THE  LIBRARY 

OF 

THE  UNIVERSITY 

OF  CALIFORNIA 

RIVERSIDE 


HARVARD  HISTORICAL  STUDIES 

PUBLISHED  UNDER  THE  DIRECTION  OF 
THE  DEPARTMENT  OF  HISTORY 

FROM  THE  INCOME  OF 

THE   HENRY  WARREN  TORREY  FUND 
VOLUME  IV 


HARVARD  HISTORICAL  STUDIES 


I.  The  Suppression  of  the  African  Slave-Trade 
to  the  United  States  of  America,  1638-1870. 
By  W.  E.  B.  DuBois,  Ph.D..  Editor  of 
"  The  Crisis."    8vo.  $1.50  net. 

II.  The  Contest  over  the  Ratification  of  the 
Federal    Constitution    in    Massachusetts. 
By  S.  B.  Harding.  Ph.D.,  Professor  of  Euro- 
pean History  in  Indiana  University.    Svo. 

$1.35  net. 

III.  A  Critical  Study  of  Nullification  in  South 
Carolina.     By  D.  F.  Houston,  A.M.,  LL.D., 
Secretary  of  Agriculture,    Svo.     $1.25  net. 

IV.  Nominations  for  Elective  Office  in  the 
United  States.    By  Frederick  W.  Dallinger, 
A.M.,  I.L.H.,  Member  of  Congress  from 
Massachusetts.    Svo.  $1.50  net. 

V.  A  Bibliography  of  British  Municipal  His- 
tory.    Including  Gilds  and  Parliamentary 
Representation.     By  Charles  Gross,  Ph.D., 
LL.D.,  late  Gurney  Professor  of  History 
and  Political  Science  in  Harvard  Univer- 
sity.   Svo.  $2.50  net 

VI.  The  Liberty  and  Free  Soil  Parties  in  the 
Northwest.      By  Theodore  Clarke  Smith, 
Ph.D.,  Professor  of  History  in  Williams 
College.    Svo.  $1-75  net. 

VII.  The  Provincial  Governor  in  the  English 
Colonies  of  North  America.      By  Evarts 
Boutell  Greene,  Ph.D.,  Professor  of  History 
in  the  University  of  Illinois.    Svo. 

$1.50  net 

VIIL  The  County  Palatine  of  Durham.  A 
Study  in  Constitutional  History.  By 
G.  T.  Lapsley,  Ph.D.,  Fellow  of  Trinity  Col- 
lege, Cambridge.  Svo.  $2.00  net. 

IX.  The  Anglican  Episcopate  and  the  Amer- 
ican Colonies.      By  Arthur  Lyon  Cross, 
Ph.D.,  Professor  of  European  History  in  the 
University  of  Michigan.    Svo.      $2.50  net 

X.  The  Administration  of  the  American  Rev- 
olutionary Army.  By  Louis  Clinton  Hatch, 
Ph.D.    Svo.  $1.50  net 

XL  The  Civil  Service  and  the  Patronage. 
By  Carl  Russell  Fish,  Ph.D.,  Professor  of 
American  History  in  the  University  of  Wis- 
consin. Svo.  $2.00  net. 

XIL  The  Development  of  Freedom  of  the 
Press  in  Massachusetts.  By  C.  A.  Duni- 
way,  Ph.D.,  President  of  the  University  of 
Wyoming.  Svo.  $1.50  net. 


XIII.  The    Seigniorial    System    in    Canada. 
By  W.  B.  Munro.  Ph.D..  LL.D..  Professor 
of  Municipal  Government  in  Harvard  Uni- 
versity.   Svo.  $2.00  net 

XIV.  The  Frankpledge  System.     By  Wflliam 
Alfred  Morris,  Ph.D.,  Assistant  Professor 
of  English  History  in  the  University  of  Cal- 
ifornia.   Svo.  $1.50  net. 

XV.  The  Public  Life  of  Joseph  Dudley.     By 
Everett  Kimball,  Ph.D.,  Professor  of  History 
in  Smith  College.    Svo.  $2.00  net. 

XVI.  M6moire  de  Marie  Caroline,  Reine  de 
Naples.       Edited    by    Robert    Matteson 
Johnston,    A.M.,    Assistant    Professor    of 
Modern  History  in   Harvard   University. 
Svo.  $2.00  net. 

XVH.  The  Barrington-Bemard  Correspon- 
dence. Edited  by  Edward  Channing, 
Ph.D.,  McLean  Professor  of  Ancient  and 
Modern  History  in  Harvard  University. 
Svo.  $2.00  net 

XVm.  The  Government  of  the  Ottoman 
Empire  in  the  Time  of  Suleiman  the  Mag- 
nificent By  Albert  Howe  Lybyer.  Ph.D., 
Associate  Professor  of  History  in  the  Uni- 
versity of  Illinois.  Svo.  $2.00  net. 

XDC.  The  Granger  Movement.  By  S.  J. 
Buck,  Assistant  Professor  of  History  in  the 
University  of  Minnesota.  Svo.  $2.00  net 

XX.  Burgage  Tenure  in  Mediaeval  England. 
By  Morley  de  Wolf  Hemmeon,  Ph.D.,  some- 
time Austin  Teaching  Fellow  in  Harvard 
University.    Svo.  $1.50  net. 

XXI.  An  Abridgment  of  the  Indian  Affairs 
contained  in  four  folio  volumes,  transacted 
in  the  colony  o  f  New  York,  from  the  year 
1678  to  the  year  1751,  by  Peter  Wraxall. 
Edited  with  an  introduction  by  Charles 
Howard  Mcllwain,  Ph.D.,  Assistant  Pro- 
fessor of  History  in  Harvard  University. 
Svo.  $2.00  net. 

XXII.  English  Field  Systems.    By  Howard 
Levi  Gray,  Ph.D.,  Professor  of  History  in 
Bryn  Mawr  College.    Svo.          $2.75  net. 

XXIII.  The  Second  Partition  of  Poland.    By 
Robert   Howard   Lord,   Ph.D.,  Assistant 
Professor  of  History  in  Harvard  Univer- 
sity.   Svo.  $2.25  net. 


HARVARD   UNIVERSITY   PRESS 

CAMBRIDGE,  MASS.,  U.S.A. 


NOMINATIONS  FOR 

ELECTIVE  OFFICE  IN  THE 

UNITED  STATES 


FREDERICK  W.  DALLINGER,  A.M. 

MEMBER  OF  CONGRESS  FROM  MASSACHUSETTS;  FORMERLY  MEMBER  OF  THE 

MASSACHUSETTS  SENATE,  SECRETARY  OF  THE  REPUBLICAN 

CITY  COMMITTEE  OF  CAMBRIDGE,  MASS.,  ETC. 


CAMBRIDGE 
HARVARD  UNIVERSITY  PRESS 

LONDON:  HUMPHREY  MILFORD 
OXFORD  UNIVERSITY  PRESS 


83 


COPYRIGHT,  1897 
BY  THE  PRESIDENT  AND  FELLOWS  OF  HARVARD  COLLEGE 


First  Edition,  March,  1897 
Reprinted,  March,  1903 
Reprinted,  April,  1916 


PREFACE. 


TV  /T  Y  attention  was  first  called  to  the  subject  of  nominations 
•*•»•*•  while  pursuing  a  course  of  study  in  American  institu- 
tions, as  an  undergraduate  student  at  Harvard  University.  In 
connection  with  that  study  I  found,  to  my  surprise,  that 
although  certain  phases  of  the  present  nominating  system  have, 
from  time  to  time,  been  touched  upon  in  magazine  articles  and 
elsewhere,  no  systematic  attempt  has  ever  been  made  to  con- 
sider in  all  its  bearings  this  very  important  part  of  our  govern- 
mental machinery.  It  is  for  the  purpose  of  supplying  this 
deficiency  that  the  following  pages  have  been  written.  In 
them  I  have  endeavored  to  give  some  account  of  the  origin 
and  development  of  our  nominating  system,  to  describe  it 
as  it  exists  to-day,  and  then  to  point  out  the  evils  that  have 
arisen  under  it,  and  the  remedies  that  have  been  suggested 
for  their  removal. 

It  has  been  my  object  throughout  to  look  at  the  question 
from  a  strictly  non-partisan  standpoint,  and  to  treat  it  entirely 
as  a  scientific  study.  If  the  enthusiastic  Democrat  feels  in- 
clined to  consider  the  description  of  the  Boston  caucuses  as 
a  reflection  upon  his  party,  he  can  console  himself  by  com- 
paring them  with  the  Republican  primaries  at  Baltimore; 
while  the  New  York  Republican  who  is  fond  of  reproaching 
his  Democratic  neighbor  for  his  long  and  patient  submission 


i 


VJ  PREFACE. 

to  the  yoke  of  Tammany,  had  better  pause  and  consider  the 
defects  in  his  own  party  organization  under  which  the  auto- 
cratic rule  of  a  "  Boss  "  is  made  possible. 

My  study  of  the  subject  has  been  carried  on  in  connec- 
tion with  the  Seminary  of  American  History  and  Institutions 
of  Harvard  University,  where,  under  the  direction  of  Pro- 
fessors Hart  and  Channing,  every  opportunity  has  been 
afforded  me  of  pursuing  my  researches  to  the  best  possible 
advantage.  The  materials  have  been  derived  from  a  variety 
of  sources.  In  the  preparation  of  the  historical  part,  —  which 
is  necessarily  a  mere  outline,  but  which  I  trust  may  induce 
some  historical  student  to  work  out  this  hitherto  unexplored 
field,  —  I  have  used  the  colonial  records,  the  diaries  and 
correspondence  of  political  leaders,  some  of  the  earlier  his- 
tories, and  especially  the  newspapers  of  the  period. 

The  descriptive  portion,  so  far  as  national  politics  is  con- 
cerned, is  based  upon  the  public  proceedings  of  recent 
conventions,  supplemented  by  interviews  and  correspondence 
with  men  prominent  in  national  affairs.  In  the  case  of  nomina- 
tions for  State  and  local  offices,  I  have  been  able  to  draw  to 
some  extent  upon  my  own  experience  in  Massachusetts  politics 
during  the  last  few  years.  As  secretary  of  the  Republican 
City  Committee  of  Cambridge,  Massachusetts,  as  delegate  to 
various  conventions,  and  as  a  member  of  the  State  Legislature, 
I  have  had  excellent  opportunities  for  studying  the  practical 
working  of  the  system  of  nomination  at  present  in  vogue 
throughout  the  greater  part  of  the  United  States. 

The  statements  concerning  the  unsatisfactory  conduct  of 
caucuses  and  primaries  in  chapter  v.  are  based  upon  news- 
paper accounts  and  magazine  articles,  verified  by  personal 
observation,  and  by  official  and  semi-official  publications,  such 
as  the  report  of  Civil  Service  Commissioner  Roosevelt  upon 
the  Baltimore  primaries,  and  the  statement  of  the  delegation 


PREFACE.  vii 

to  the  Democratic  National  Convention  chosen  at  the  "Anti- 
Snappers'"  convention  at  Syracuse  in  1892. 

The  remedies  for  the  evils  of  the  present  system  enumerated 
in  chapter  vii.  have  been  selected  with  care  from  an  enormous 
mass  of  periodical  literature  which  has  appeared  during  the 
last  fifteen  years.  The  chapter  on  the  regulation  of  nomina- 
tions by  law  is  based  upon  compilations  of  statutory  enact- 
ments and  other  information,  kindly  furnished  by  the  secretaries 
of  state  of  the  various  States  of  the  Union.  The  material  for 
the  last  two  chapters  was  drawn  from  the  printed  rules  and 
other  publications  issued  by  the  various  political  committees 
and  organizations,  supplemented,  in  the  case  of  Cambridge, 
by  my  own  experience. 

In  conclusion,  I  desire  to  thank  Mr.  Daniel  Remsen  for 
material  regarding  nominations  in  New  York  city,  and  also 
Mr.  E.  Ellery  Anderson  and  Mr.  Wallace  MacFarlane  for  informa- 
tion relative  to  the  "Snap  Convention"  of  1892.  My  thanks 
are  also  due  my  fellow-townsman,  Mr.  George  G.  Wright,  the 
able  and  efficient  secretary  of  the  Library  Hall  Association, 
for  information  concerning  the  history  and  work  of  that  unique 
and  valuable  organization.  Above  all,  I  wish  to  express  my 
grateful  acknowledgment  to  Professor  Albert  Bushnell  Hart  for 
the  kind  interest  he  has  shown  in  my  work  from  the  very  out- 
set, especially  in  reading  the  manuscript  and  in  making  many 
valuable  suggestions. 

FREDERICK  W.    DALLINGER. 

CAMBRIDGE,  July  i,  1896. 


CONTENTS. 


i. 


HISTORICAL  SKETCH  OF  NOMINATING  MACHINERY 
IN   THE   UNITED   STATES. 

CHAPTER    I. 

DEVELOPMENT  OF  THE  NOMINATING  SYSTEM. 

PAGE 

1.  Necessity  of  Some  System  ..............  3 

2.  Nominations  in  the  Colonial  Period  ...........  4 

3.  The  Origin  of  the  Caucus     ..............  7 

4.  The  Pre-Revolutionary  Caucus      ............  8 

5.  The  Post-Revolutionary  Caucus     ............  12 

6.  The  Early  Congressional  Nominating  Caucus  (1788-1804)     ...  13 

7.  Continuance  of  the  Congressional  Caucus  (1804-1824)  .....  17 

8.  Development  of  the  Nominating  Convention  in  Pennsylvania     .     .  21 

9.  Development  of  the  Convention  in  Massachusetts    ......  23 

10.  State  Nominations  by  Legislative  Caucus   .........  25 

11.  Decline  of  the  Legislative  Caucus  (1811-1835)     .......  27 

12.  Presidential  Nominations  by  Legislative  Resolution      .....  29 

13.  Presidential  Nominations  by  State  Legislative  Caucus  .....  31 

14.  Presidential  Nominations  by  Mixed  Conventions      ......  32 

15.  Presidential  Nominations  by  State  Conventions    .......  33 

1  6.  Presidential  Nominations  by  Public  Meetings       .......  34 

17.  Reasons  for  a  Change  of  System  ............  35 

1  8.  The  Rise  of  the  National  Convention     ..........  36 

19.  The  National  Convention  Fully  Established    ........  39 

20.  The  Question  of  Procedure  ..............  40 

•21.  The  Call  of  National  Conventions  and  the  Choice  of  Delegates  .     .  43 

22.  The  Growth  of  Party  Organization    ...........  44 

23.  The  Present  System  Summarized  ............  45 


CONTENTS. 

Dart  II. 

DESCRIPTION   OF  THE   PRESENT  SYSTEM   OF   NOMI- 
NATION. 


CHAPTER  II. 

NOMINATIONS  FOR  LOCAL  OFFICES. 

PACK 

1 .  Nominations  in  Towns 51 

2.  Nominations  in  Cities 52 

3.  Caucuses  or  Primary  Meetings 53 

4.  Preparation  for  Caucuses 56 

5.  Local  Committees  and  their  Influence  on  Nominations       ....  59 

6.  Nominations  for  County  Offices 61 


CHAPTER   III. 
NOMINATIONS  FOR  STATE  OFFICES. 

1.  The  General  System 63 

2.  State  Conventions 64 

3.  Nominating  Procedure  of  State  Conventions 65 

4.  Nomination  of  Minor  State  Officers 68 

5.  Preparation  for  State  Conventions 69 

6.  Executive  Councillors  and  Judges 71 

7.  Nominations  for  the  State  Legislature 71 

8.  The  Nomination  of  Officers  elected  by  the  Legislature       ....  72 


CHAPTER    IV. 
NOMINATIONS  FOR  NATIONAL  OFFICES. 

1.  Relative  Importance  of  National  Elections 74 

2.  The  Call  of  National  Conventions 75 

3.  The  Choice  of  Delegates 76 

4.  Organization  of  National  Conventions 78 

5.  Nominating  Proceedings  in  National  Conventions 84 

6.  Nomination  of  Presidential  Electors 87 

7.  Nominations  for  the  National  House  of  Representatives    ....  88 


CONTENTS.  XI 

PACK 

8.  Nomination  of  Candidates  for  the  United  States  Senate  ....       89 

9.  Nominations  for  the  Offices  of  the  Senate  and  House  of  Represen- 

tatives   90 


III. 

DEFECTS  OF  THE   PRESENT  SYSTEM. 

CHAPTER  V. 
ABUSES  OF  THE  CAUCUS  OR  PRIMARY. 

1.  Importance  of  the  Primaries 95 

2.  Primaries  in  Cities 95 

3.  Early  Disorderly  Primaries 96 

4.  New  Difficulties  in  the  Primaries 99 

5.  The  Primary  in  New  York  City 100 

6.  The  Tammany  Organization 101 

7.  The  Republican  Organization  in  New  York  City 104 

8.  The  County  Democracy  in  New  York  City 107 

9.  The  Present  Condition  of  the  New  York  Primaries 108 

10.  Boss-rule  in  New  York  City 109 

11.  Primaries  in  Philadelphia HI 

12.  The  Baltimore  Primaries 112 

13.  Caucuses  in  Boston 115 

14.  "  Snap  "  Caucuses  and  Primaries 121 

15.  "  Packed  "  Caucuses  and  Primaries 125 

CHAPTER   VI. 
ABUSES  OF  THE  CONVENTION  SYSTEM. 

1.  The  System  in  General 127 

2.  The  Crawford  County  System  as  a  Substitute  for  Conventions  .     .  127 

3.  Corruption  and  Fraud  in  Conventions 130 

4.  "Snap  Conventions" 132 

5.  The  State  "Boss  "  as  a  Master  of  Conventions 132 

6.  The  Two-Thirds  Rule  in  National  Conventions 133 

7.  The  Unit  Rule 134 

8.  Delegates  from  States  controlled  by  the  Other  Party 134 


xii  CONTENTS. 

tfart  iv. 

REMEDIES  FOR  EXISTING  EVILS. 

CHAPTER  VII. 

GENERAL  REMEDIES. 

PAGE 

1.  Need  of  Reform 141 

2.  The  Election  or  Appointment  of  a  Permanent  Board  of  Delegates  141 

3.  Regulation  of  Nominations  by  Party  Rules 142 

4.  The  Subdivision  of  Caucus  Districts 143 

5.  Regulation  of  Nominations  by  Law 143 

6.  "  Nomination  Papers  "  as  a  Substitute  for  the  Caucus      ....  144 

7.  The  Substitution  of  Primary  Elections  for  the  System  of  Delegate 

Conventions 145 

8.  Complete  Legalization  of  Nominating  Machinery 146 

9.  Minority  Nominations 147 

10.  Proportional  Representation 147 

n.  A  Diminution  in  the  Number  of  Elective  Offices 148 

12.  Civil  Service  Reform 149 

13.  The  Divorce  of  National  and  State  Politics  from  Municipal  Affairs  150 

14.  Greater  Interest  in  Public  Affairs  on  the  Part  of  the  Voters  .     .     .  151 

15.  The  Need  of  Education 152 

1 6.  Intelligent  Organization 153 


CHAPTER  VIII. 
THE  REMEDY  OF  REGULATION  BY  PARTY  RULES. 

1.  The  Adoption  of  Party  Rules 154 

2.  Enrolment  of  Voters 155 

3.  Qualifications  for  Enrolment 156 

4.  Manner  of  Enrolment 157 

5.  Deprivation  of  Enrolment 159 

6.  Working  of  the  Enrolment  System 160 

7.  The  Conduct  of  Caucuses  and  Primaries 161 

8.  Cases  of  Disputed  Choice 165 

9.  The  Call  of  Conventions 166 

10.  Apportionment  of  Delegates 167 

n.  Procedure  of  Conventions 167 


CONTENTS.  xiii 

PAGE 

12.  The  Use  of  Proxies 169 

13.  Status  of  Office-holders 170 

14.  Conclusions  in  Regard  to  Party  Rules 171 


CHAPTER   IX. 
REGULATION  BY  LAW. 

1.  The  Introduction  of  Legislation 175 

2.  The  Regulation  of  Nominations  under  the  Australian  Ballot  Acts  174 

3.  Certificates  of  Nomination 1 76 

4.  Nomination  Papers 177 

5.  Filing  of  Nomination  Papers 179 

6.  Withdrawal  of  Candidates 180 

7.  Settlement  of  Disputes 181 

8.  Publication  of  Nominations 181 

9.  Penalties 182 

10.  Special  Laws  governing  Nominations 182 

n.  Time  and  Place  of  holding  Primaries 183 

12.  Qualifications  for  Voting  at  Caucuses  and  Primary  Elections     .     .  185 

13.  Organization  and  Conduct  of  Caucuses  and  Primary  Elections  .     .  186 

14.  Penal  Provisions 187 

15.  Provisions  Relative  to  Nominating  Conventions 189 

1 6.  The  Massachusetts  Act  of  1894 192 

17.  Massachusetts  Legislation  in  the  Boston  Caucuses 195 

18.  Practical  Effect  of  Legislation 197 


CHAPTER  X. 
SUPERVISION  BY  CITIZENS'  ASSOCIATIONS  :   CONCLUSION. 

1.  Difficulty  of  Enforcing  Laws 199 

2.  Citizens'  Movements  and  Tickets 200 

3.  The  Philadelphia  "  Committee  of  One  Hundred  " 200 

4.  The  New  York  Committee  of  Seventy 205 

5.  The  Library  Hall  Association  of  Cambridge,  Massachusetts     .     .  207 

6.  Other  Citizens'  Associations 214 

7.  Conclusions  in  Regard  to  Citizens'  Associations 215 

8.  The  Question  of  Nominations  Summarized 216 


xiv 


CONTENTS. 


APPENDICES. 

PACE 

APPENDIX  A.    Bibliography 221 

APPENDIX  B.     Forms  used  in  Caucuses 225 

APPENDIX  C.     Documents  illustrative  of  National  Conventions     .    .  234 
APPENDIX  D.     Rules  of  the  Republican  City  Committee  of  Cambridge, 

Mass 239 

APPENDIX  E.     Forms  used  under  the  Australian  Ballot  Acts     ...  245 

APPENDIX  F.     Forms  used  in  Speakership  Campaigns 256 

APPENDIX  G.    The  Massachusetts  Caucus  Law 258 

APPENDIX  H.    Forms  used  by  Citizens'  Associations 273 


INDEX 279 


NOMINATIONS   FOR   ELECTIVE   OFFICE 
IN   THE    UNITED   STATES. 


HISTORICAL  SKETCH   OF   NOMINATING  MACHINERY 
IN  THE  UNITED   STATES. 


CHAPTER    I. 

DEVELOPMENT   OF   THE   NOMINATING   SYSTEM. 

I.  Necessity  of  Some  System.  From  the  very  earliest  times, 
wherever  popular  government  has  existed,  the  necessity  of 
some  method  of  selecting  candidates  previous  to  the  formal 
election  has  been  recognized.  In  the  choice  of  the  judges  of 
Israel,  as  Mr.  G.  W.  Lawton  l  has  pointed  out,  "  parlor  caucuses  " 
were  not  unknown,  and  the  methods  of  the  professional  politi- 
cians of  our  own  time  can  be  found  described  in  the  quaint 
language  of  the  Old  Testament.  Again,  in  the  early  days  of 
Rome  it  was  the  custom  for  aspirants  for  elective  office,  clothed 
in  the  white  toga,  to  plead  their  own  merits  before  the  as- 
sembled voters,  from  which  custom  our  word  "  candidate "  is 
derived. 

Coming  down  to  later  times,  when  the  foundations  of  popular 
government  in  England  began  to  be  laid  on  the  ruins  of  the 
feudal  system,  we  find  a  method  of  self-nomination,  or  self- 
announced  candidacy,  similar  to  the  Roman  custom.  This  was 
supplemented  by  a  system  of  nomination  by.  small  cliques  of 
wealthy  land-owners,  who  at  that  time,  on  account  of  the  limited 
suffrage,  were  able  to  control  the  parliamentary  elections.2  At 

1  The  American  Caucus  System  (Putnam,  1885),  26-28.     See  also  Book  of  Judges, 
chapter  ix. 

2  There  existed  also  the  legal  nomination   at  the  hustings  on  "  Nomination 
Day,"  as  it  was  called,  which  was  open  to  voters  of  all  parties,  and  was  in  fact 
simply  a  sort  of  preliminary  election.     In  case  no  more  persons  were  nominated 
than  there  were  members  to  be  elected,  there  was  said  to  be  an  "  uncontested  elec- 
tion."   On  the  other  hand,  where  the  number  of  nominees  exceeded  the  number  of 
persons  to  be  elected,  the  election  was  said  to  be  "  contested,"  and  a  subsequent 
"polling"  of  the  voters  was  required  to  be  held.     Since  1872,  the  system  of  nomi- 
nation by  a  nomination  paper  signed  by  ten  voters  has  taken  the  place  of  the  old 
nomination  day.     Further,  a  more  or  less  effective  choice  of  party  candidates  by 


4  THE  NOMINATING  SYSTEM.  [CHAP.  I. 

the  time  of  the  settlement  of  the  American  colonies  these  were 
practically  the  only  methods  of  nomination  in  vogue  among 
English-speaking  people,  and  therefore  the  only  ones  with 
which  the  colonists  were  familiar.  In  the  present  chapter  we 
shall  endeavor  to  see  how  the  latter,  in  the  matter  of  nomination 
as  in  other  phases  of  popular  government,  adapted  the  customs 
which  they  brought  with  them  to  the  new  conditions  which  sur- 
rounded them  here,  and  by  what  steps  our  nominating  machinery 
has  reached  its  present  high  state  of  development. 

2.  Nominations  in  the  Colonial  Period.  Only  fragmentary  infor- 
mation can  be  obtained  in  regard  to  the  method  of  nominating 
candidates  for  elective  office  in  the  colonies.8  In  the  investiga- 
tion of  such  a  subject,  the  colonial  records  afford  little  assistance 
to  the  student,  as  nominations  were  for  the  most  part  unofficial 
and  therefore  unrecorded.  Neither  contemporary  histories, 
nor  the  diaries  and  correspondence  of  public  men,  add  much 
information ;  while  the  newspapers  of  the  period  are  especially 
unsatisfactory  and  disappointing  to  the  investigator. 

From  the  meagre  sources  at  our  disposal,  however,  it  appears 
that  in  the  South  candidacies  were,  as  a  rule,  self-announced, 
after  the  English  custom,4  and  this  method  of  self-nomination, 
often  supplemented,  as  in  the  mother  country,  by  an  agreement 
among  the  leading  planters,  continued  to  be  the  prevailing 
method  of  nomination  for  district  officers  in  the  Southern  and 
Southwestern  States  down  to  the  Civil  War.  The  causes  of  its 
general  disuse  are  to  be  found  in  its  unpopularity  in  democratic 
communities,  and  its  incompatibility  with  that  unified  action 
which  is  essential  to  party  government6 

local  organizations  of  the  voters  appears  to  be  rapidly  displacing  the  old  practice 
of  self-announced  candidacy.  The  recent  introduction  of  a  modified  caucus  system 
by  the  Liberal  party  is  a  significant  change  in  English  political  methods.  See  note 
134  of  this  chapter. 

*  In  all  except  the  charter  colonies  —  Massachusetts,  Rhode  Island  and  Con- 
necticut—  the  number  of  elective  offices  was  very  small,  being  confined  to  members 
of  the  lower  house  of  the  colonial  legislature  and  a  few  local  officers. 

*  See    Writings  of  Washington  (Sparks),   II.   388;    Rowland,  Life  of  George 
Mason,  II.  52  ;  Letters  of  Joseph  Jones  of  Virginia  (1777-1787),  145;  McRee,  Lift 
and  Correspondence  of  James  Iredell,  II.  171. 

6  At  the  present  time  it  is  a  common  occurrence,  particularly  in  the  South  and 
West,  for  persons  to  announce  themselves  as  candidates  for  a  particular  elective 


SECT.  2.]    NOMINATIONS  IN  THE  COLONIAL  PERIOD.          5 

In  New  England  and  the  Middle  Colonies  nominations  were, 
in  some  cases,  also  self-announced;  but  more  frequently  they 
were  made  at  private  conferences,  or  at  what  would  now  be 
called  "  parlor  caucuses,"  of  those  especially  interested  in  public 
affairs,  —  that  is,  by  the  leading  men  of  the  community.  Al- 
though there  were  no  well  defined  and  permanent  political 
parties,  nevertheless  exciting  political  contests  sometimes  oc- 
curred, and  there  certainly  existed  some  sort  of  an  agreement 
upon  candidates  previous  to  election  corresponding  to  the  cau- 
cus or  primary  of  later  times ;  and  there  occasionally  appears 
to  have  been  an  agreement  extending  through  the  different 
towns,  corresponding  to  the  modern  State  convention.  For 
instance,  in  Massachusetts,  at  the  election  in  May,  1635,  Haynes 
was  elected  governor  over  Ludlow,  who,  as  one  of  the  Assistants, 
felt  that  he  was  entitled  to  the  position.  According  to  Gov- 
ernor Winthrop,  Ludlow  "  protested  against  the  election  of 
Governor  as  void,  for  that  the  deputies  of  the  several  towns  had 
agreed  upon  the  election  before  they  came."  6 

In  addition  to  self-nominations  and  "  parlor  caucuses  "  there 
existed,  in  some  of  the  colonies,  a  system  of  official  nomination, 
which,  in  the  cases  of  Connecticut  and  Massachusetts  at  least, 
was  a  distinctly  American  invention.  In  New  Jersey,  for  in- 
stance, there  existed  at  one  time  a  system  under  which  in  each 
county  twenty-five  nominators  were  chosen  by  lot,  whose  duty 
it  was  to  select  candidates  for  the  colonial  legislature  to  be 
voted  upon  at  the  regular  election.7  A  more  elaborate  system 
of  official  nomination,  and  one  possessing  greater  vitality,  is 
found  in  the  records  of  the  Connecticut  colony.  By  the  pro- 
visions of  the  "  Fundamental  Orders"  of  1638-9,  a  "  Court  of 

office ;  but  in  such  cases  the  actual  choice  of  a  candidate  is  almost  invariably  left  to 
the  party  voters  in  their  primaries  and  conventions.  In  some  cases  even  now,  a 
person  may  announce  himself  as  an  independent  candidate ;  but  as  a  rule,  even  in 
such  cases,  the  aspirant  or  his  friends  usually  consider  it  wise  to  go  through  the 
form,  at  any  rate,  of  a  nomination  by  some  sort  of  a  meeting  of  voters,  or  by  a  con- 
vention of  delegates  chosen  at  such  meetings. 

6  Winthrop,  History  of  New  England,  I.  158.     See  also  Letter  Book  of  Samuel 
Sewall,  Mass.  Hist.  Coll.,  6th  series,  I.  295. 

7  See  N.  J.  Archives,  I.  397,  398.     Mr.  C.  F.  Bishop  in  his  History  of  Elections  in 
the  American  Colonies,  chapter  iii.  §  5,  has  a  short  account  of  this  system  (Columbia 
College  Studies,  III.  120-127). 


6  THE  NOMINATING  SYSTEM.  [CHAP.  I. 

Election  " 8  was  held  annually  for  the  choice  of  a  governor  and 
six  magistrates,  at  which  no  person  could  be  voted  for  unless 
he  had  been  previously  nominated.  The  deputies  from  each 
town  were  empowered  to  nominate  two  candidates,  and  the 
Court  itself  was  empowered  to  "  add  so  many  more  as  they 
judge  requisite."  9  From  the  list  of  candidates  thus  nominated, 
the  governor  and  magistrates  were  then  elected  by  the  freemen 
of  the  colony. 

The  Charter  of  1662  did  not  follow  the  Fundamental  Orders 
in  prescribing  the  manner  of  nomination  and  election  of  colonial 
officers,  such  details  being  left  to  statute  law.  In  general,  the 
system,  as  established  by  various  orders  passed  at  different 
times,  was  as  follows.  The  freemen  of  the  several  towns  met  on 
a  certain  day  and  voted  for  twenty  persons  to  be  nominated  for 
"Assistants,"  i.  e.  members  of  the  council  or  upper  house  of 
the  legislature.10  The  result  of  the  vote  of  each  town  was  then 
sent  to  Hartford,  where  the  vote  of  the  entire  colony  was  counted 
in  the  presence  of  the  two  houses  of  the  legislature ;  a  list  of  the 
names  of  the  twenty  persons  receiving  the  highest  number  of 
votes  was  sent  to  each  town;  and  from  this  list  of  officially 
nominated  candidates  each  freeman  voted  for  twelve  at  the 
regular  election.11 

This  unique  system,  which  also  existed  for  a  time  in  Massa- 

8  The  colonial  legislature  sat  annually  as  a  sort  of  official  State  convention. 
*  Colonial  Records  of  Connecticut,  I.  20-26. 

10  Until  1708,  the  governor  and  deputy-governor  were  chosen,  like  the  council, 
from  the  twenty  names  nominated,  but  in  the  session  of  1707-8  that  part  of  the  law 
was  repealed,  and  thereafter  the  freemen  were  at  liberty  "  to  choose  for  the  Gov- 
ernor and  Deputy-Governor,  when  they  see  cause,  of  all  or  any  of  the  freemen  within 
this  colony."  (Colonial  Records,  V.  39.) 

11  The  details  of  the  system  are  interesting.     After  the  first  vote  for  the  nomi- 
nation of  candidates  on  the  third  Tuesday  in  March,  the  ballots  of  each  town  were 
sealed  up  and  taken  by  the  town  constable  to  the  county  seat ;  the  ballots  of  all 
the  towns  in  the  county  were  then  taken  to  Hartford  by  the  constable  of  the  county 
town,  or  by  some  person  chosen  by  the  different  town  constables.     On  the  last 
Tuesday  in  March  (which  date,  together  with  the  time  of  the  first  election,  was 
changed  in  1697  to  September)  the  votes  were  counted  in  the  presence  of  the  general 
assembly.     By  the  order  of  1689,  the  counting  was  done  by  the  constables  who 
brought  the  votes  from  the  county  towns  ;  but  the  order  of  1697  provided  that  the 
counting  should  be  done  by  the  general  assembly  itself.    (Colonial  Records,  IV.  n 
and  224)- 


SECT.  3.]  THE   ORIGIN  OF  THE  CAUCUS.  7 

chusetts,12  survived  in  Connecticut  down  to  the  adoption  of  the 
present  State  constitution  in  1818;  and  from  1789  to  1818  the 
Connecticut  members  of  the  National  House  of  Representatives 
were  chosen  by  the  same  general  method. 

3.  The  Origin  of  the  Caucus.  With  the  commencement  of  the 
struggle  between  the  colonies  and  the  crown,  permanent  party 
lines  began  to  be  drawn  for  the  first  time.  At  the  beginning  it 
was  a  contest  between  the  "  court  party,"  or  the  friends  of  the 
royal  governor,  on  the  one  hand,  and  the  "  popular  "  party,  or 
the  friends  of  colonial  self-government,  on  the  other ;  later  the 
contending  factions  took  the  definite  names  of  Whig  and  Tory, 
—  the  opponents  and  supporters  of  the  colonial  policy  of  the 
crown.  As  the  struggle  progressed,  numerous  patriotic  soci- 
eties sprang  up  in  all  the  colonies,  corresponding  to  the  Jacobin 
clubs  of  the  French  Revolution,  although  differing  widely  from 
the  latter  in  their  methods.  These  organizations  not  only  kept 
alive  the  agitation  which  finally  resulted  in  American  indepen- 
dence, but  also  in  many  sections  nominated  the  Whig  candi- 
dates for  the  various  elective  offices.  This  was  especially  true 
in  Massachusetts,  where  these  clubs  were  generally  known  as 


"caucuses." 13 

12  See  Records  of  the  Colony  of  Massachusetts  Bay,  II.  21,  286-7,  ar>d  Colonial 
Laws  of  Massachusetts  (Boston,  1889),  149-150;  see  also  Plymouth  Colony  Records, 
III.  187.  This  curious  system  of  official  nomination  may  have  been  an  adaptation 
to  new  conditions  of  the  ancient  custom  of  nomination,  or  rather  of  indirect  election, 
of  members  of  Parliament  in  some  of  the  English  boroughs,  notably  in  York. 
See  Stubbs,  Constitutional  History  of  England,  III.  417. 

18  The  derivation  of  the  word  caucus,  which  first  appeared  about  1724  in  Massa- 
chusetts, is  still  in  doubt.  According  to  colonial  writers  the  word  was  origi- 
nally a  corruption  of  cattlkers, —  the  word  "meeting"  being  understood,  —  from 
the  fact  that  it  was  first  applied  to  political  meetings  attended  chiefly  by  ship- 
building mechanics  or  caulkers  at  the  north  end  of  Boston.  Mr.  Horace  Scudder, 
however,  considers  this  to  be  a  "fanciful  derivation."  (Memorial  History  of  Bos- 
ton, II.  443.)  According  to  another  theory  the  word  comes  from  the  Greek  word 
itavitlov,  meaning  a  cup  (Century  Dictionary,  I.  866),  a  derivation  suggested  by 
the  convivial  features  of  some  of  the  early  caucuses ;  but  this  is  certainly  far 
more  fanciful  than  the  first  theory.  Of  late  years  attempts  have  been  made  to  dis- 
cover an  Indian  derivation  for  the  word.  For  instance,  Dr.  J.  H.  Trumbull  of  the 
American  Philological  Society  has  suggested  a  possible  derivation  from  an  Algon- 
quin word  meaning  "  one  who  talks  with  "  and  hence  "  advises  or  urges,"  which 
occurs  in  Captain  Smith's  Virginia.  (Murray's  New  English  Dictionary,  Part 
V.  191.)  In  support  of  this  derivation  it  is  asserted  that  Indian  names  were  com- 


8  THE  NOMINATING  SYSTEM.  [CHAF.  I. 

4.  The  Prc- Revolutionary  Caucus.  Inasmuch  as  the  caucus  of 
the  Revolutionary  period  was  the  prototype  of  the  caucus,  or 
primary,  of  to-day,  a  brief  description  of  the  earlier  institution 
may  not  be  out  of  place.  Gordon,  in  his  history  of  the  Revolu- 
tion, thus  describes  the  object  and  procedure  of  the  early 
caucuses : 

"  It  [i.  e.  the  word  caucus]  seems  to  mean  a  number  of  per- 
sons, whether  more  or  less,  met  together  to  consult  upon  adopt- 
ing and  prosecuting  some  scheme  of  policy  for  carrying  a 
favorite  point.  The  word  is  not  of  novel  invention.  More  than 
fifty  years  ago  Mr.  Samuel  Adams'  father  and  twenty  others, 
one  or  two  from  the  north  end  of  the  town,  where  all  the  ship 
business  is  carried  on,  used  to  meet,  make  a  caucus,  and  lay 
their  plans  for  introducing  certain  persons  into  places  of  trust 
and  power.  When  they  had  settled  it,  they  separated,  and  used 
each  their  particular  influence  within  his  own  circle.  He  and 
his  friends  would  furnish  themselves  with  ballots,  including  the 
names  of  the  parties  fixed  upon,  which  they  distributed  on  the 
day  of  election.  By  acting  in  concert,  together  with  a  careful 
and  extensive  distribution  of  ballots,  they  generally  carried  the 
elections  to  their  own  mind.  In  like  manner  it  was  that  Mr. 
Samuel  Adams  first  became  a  representative  for  Boston."  14 

monly  taken  by  clubs  and  secret  societies  in  New  England.  But  according  to  the 
late  Professor  Ilorsford,  an  eminent  authority  on  the  Indian  dialects  of  New  Eng- 
land, whose  opinion  the  writer  was  fortunate  enough  to  secure  shortly  before  his 
death,  the  only  Indian  word  for  "  talker  "  or  "  counsellor  "  in  use  in  New  England 
was  "sagamore;"  and  he  was  of  the  opinion  that  the  derivation  given  by  the 
colonial  writers  was  more  probably  correct,  i.  e.  that  the  word  was  originally  a 
corruption  of  "  caulkers,"  being  probably  applied  in  derision  by  the  Tories  to  politi- 
cal meetings  of  the  Whigs  held  in  Boston. 

In  spite  of  considerable  opposition  from  the  more  fastidious  (e.  g.  see  Niles's 
comments  in  1820,  Nileis  Register,  XVIII.  97,  and  the  forcible  words  of  Governor 
Troup  of  Georgia  in  1823,  Niles's  Register,  XXV.  292-3),  the  word  "caucus,"  what- 
ever its  derivation,  came  to  be  used  more  and  more  until  it  has  come  to  be  firmly 
implanted  in  the  language.  Moreover,  in  recent  years,  both  the  word  and  the 
institution  have  been  introduced  into  England  by  the  leaders  of  the  Liberal 
party.  In  this  country  the  word,  at  least  in  the  legislative  sense,  is  in  common  use 
everywhere,  but  as  applied  to  primary  meetings  of  the  party  voters  its  use  is  con- 
fined chiefly  to  New  England  and  those  parts  of  the  West  dominated  by  New  Eng- 
land  influence ;  elsewhere  the  institution  of  the  caucus  is  commonly  known  by  the 
terms  "  primary  "  or  "  primary  election." 

14  Gordon,  History  of  the  American  Revolution,  3rd  Am.  ed.,  I,  240,  note. 


SECT. 4.]         THE  PRE-REVOLUTIONARY  CAUCUS.  9 

During  the  early  period  of  its  existence  this  caulkers'  or 
caucus  club  was  composed  of  a  few  persons  who  met  at  each 
other's  houses  and  there  made  up  lists  of  candidates  for  the 
annual  election.  Later,  however,  the  membership  was  increased, 
among  the  new  acquisitions  being  such  men  as  Otis,  Warren, 
Hancock,  Pemberton,  Austin,  and  John  Adams.15  Gradually 
the  meetings  of  the  club  came  to  be  more  publicly  held,  and  in 
the  formation  of  a  "  ticket "  a  conference  committee  was  fre- 
quently appointed  to  act  in  conjunction  with  a  similar  com- 
mittee appointed  by  the  "  Merchants'  Club,"  another  political 
organization  of  the  same  character.  The  following  account  of 
the  caucus  club,  during  this  later  period,  is  found  in  the  diary  of 
John  Adams,  shortly  before  he  became  a  member : 16 

"  Boston,  February.  This  day  learned  that  the  Caucus  Club 
meets  at  certain  times  in  the  garret  of  Tom  Dawes,  the  Adjutant 
of  the  Boston  Regiment.  He  has  a  large  house,  and  he  has  a 
movable  partition  in  his  garret  which  he  takes  down,  and  the 
whole  club  meets  in  one  room.  There  they  smoke  tobacco  till 
you  cannot  see  from  one  end  of  the  garret  to  the  other.17 
There  they  drink  flip,  I  suppose,  and  there  they  choose  a 
moderator  who  puts  questions  to  the  vote  regularly ;  and  select- 
men, assessors,  collectors,  fire-wards  and  representatives  are 
regularly  chosen  before  they  are  chosen  in  the  town."  18 

18  Wells,  Life  of  Samuel  Adams,  I.  85-6. 

16  In  1763.     See  John  Adams'  Works,  (1850  ed.)  II.  144. 

17  This  feature  of  tobacco  smoke  at  caucuses  still  prevails  in  all  its  pristine 
vigor. 

18  Fifty  years  later  (1809)  we  get  another  view  of  the  same  institution  from  the 
pen  of  Dr.  Eliot : 

"From  the  year  1768,"  he  says,  "a  number  of  politicians  met  at  each  other's 
houses  to  discuss  public  affairs,  and  to  settle  upon  the  best  methods  of  serving  the 
town  and  country.  Many  of  these  filled  public  offices  (cf.  participation  of  office- 
holders in  primaries  to-day).  But  the  meetings  were  private  and  had  a  silent  influ- 
ence upon  the  publick  body.  In  1772,  they  agreed  to  increase  their  number,  to 
meet  in  a  larger  room,  and  invite  a  number  of  substantial  mechanicks  to  join  them, 
and  hold  a  kind  of  caucus,  pro  bono  publico.  They  met  in  a  house  near  the  north 
battery,  and  more  than  sixty  were  present  at  the  first  meeting.  Their  regulations 
(corresponding  to  party  rules)  were  drawn  up  by  Dr.  Warren  and  another  gentle- 
man. ...  It  answered  a  good  purpose  to  get  such  a  number  of  mechanicks 
together ;  and  though  a  number  of  Whigs  of  the  first  character  in  the  town  were 
present,  they  always  had  a  mechanick  for  moderator,  —  generally  one  who  could 
carry  many  votes  by  his  influence.  It  was  a  matter  of  policy,  likewise  to  assemble 


10  THE  NOMINATING  SYSTEM.  [CHAP.  I. 

That  the  Caucus  Club,  or  "  North  End  Caucus,"  as  it  later 
came  to  be  called,  was  a  recognized  institution  in  1764,  is  shown 
by  the  following  warily  worded  appeal : 

To  THE  FREEHOLDERS,  &c.  Modesty  preventing  a  personal  appli- 
cation (customary  in  other  places)  for  your  interest  to  elect  particular 
persons  to  be  your  representatives,  we  therefore  request  your  votes  for 
those  gentlemen  who  have  steadily  adhered  to  your  interest  in  times 
past,  especially  in  the  affair  of  Trade,  by  sending  timely  instructions, 
requested  by  our  agent,  relating  to  Acts  of  Trade,  late  pending  in 
Parliament.  Your  humble  servants, 

The  Caucus.19 

To  the  North  End  Caucus  is  due  a  famous  historical  event,— 
the  Boston  Tea  Party.  "  As  the  time  approached  when  the  tea 
ships  might  be  expected,"  says  Mr.  Frothingham,  in  his  Life 
and  Times  of  Joseph  Warren,  "  the  subject  was  considered  in  the 
North  End  Caucus.  .  .  .  This  body  voted  (October  23)  that 
they  would  oppose  with  their  lives  and  fortunes  the  landing  of 
any  tea  that  might  be  sent  to  the  town  for  sale  by  the  East  India 
Company."  At  a  subsequent  meeting  it  was  voted  "  that  the 
tea  shipped  by  the  East  India  Company  shall  not  be  landed."  ** 
The  modus  operandi  of  the  caucus  in  regard  to  the  nomination 
of  candidates  may  be  seen  by  the  following  entry  in  the  journal 
on  the  day  before  the  election  of  1772  : 

Voted,  — That  this  body  will  use  their  influence  that  Thomas  Gushing, 
Samuel  Adams,  John  Hancock  and  William  Phillips  be  Representatives 
for  the  year  ensuing. 

Voted,  —  That  Gibbons  Sharp,  Nathaniel  Barber  &c.  ...  be  a  Com- 
mittee to  distribute  votes  for  these  gentlemen.21 

In  addition  to  the  North  End  Caucus  and  the  Merchants' 
Club,  to  which  reference  has  already  been  made,  there  were 

at  that  part  of  the  town.  It  had  the  effect  to  awake  the  north  -wind  and  stir  the 
waters  of  the  troubled  sea.  By  this  body  of  men,  the  most  important  matters  were 
decided  —  they  agreed  who  should  be  in  town  offices,  in  the  general  court  and  in 
the  provincial  congress  from  Boston."  Eliot,  Biographical  Dictionary,  472-3. 

19  Boston  Evening  Post,  May  4,  1764. 

*°  Lift  and  Times  of  Joseph  Warren,  238-40. 

11  Sec  Wells,  Life  of  Samuel  Adams,  I.  471. 


SECT.  4.]        THE  PRE-REVOLUTIONARY  CAUCUS.  IX 

numerous  other  organizations  of  a  similar  character,  of  which 
the  most  important  were  the  "  South  End  Caucus  "  and  the 
"Middle  District  Caucus."22  All  of  these  organizations  were 
societies  or  clubs  rather  than  public  meetings  of  the  voters ;  M 
but  they  evidently  performed  exactly  the  same  function  as  our 
caucuses  and  primaries  to-day.  As  there  were  a  number  of 
them  situated  in  different  parts  of  the  town,  they  may  fairly  be 
considered  as  identical  with  the  Boston  ward  caucuses  of  the 
present  day.  The  private  and  more  or  less  secret  character  of 
the  meetings  was  simply  a  necessary  precaution  to  prevent  the 
Tories  from  learning  the  plans  of  the  patriot  party.24  Further- 
more, the  appointment  of  a  conference  committee  by  one  caucus 
to  confer  with  a  similar  committee  from  each  of  the  other  organ- 
izations was  nothing  more  nor  less  than  a  rough  sort  of  delegate 
convention. 

Outside  of  New  England  during  the  Revolutionary  period, 
nominations  for  the  various  elective  offices,  particularly  that  of 
delegate  to  the  Continental  Congress,  appear  to  have  been  made 
by  branches  of  the  "  Sons  of  Liberty,"  by  the  Committee  of 
Correspondence,  or  by  a  Conference  Committee  composed  of 
delegates  from  these  and  kindred  organizations.  For  instance, 
in  New  York,  on  July  4,  1774,  the  Committee  of  Correspon- 
dence nominated  five  delegates  to  the  Continental  Congress  "  for 
recommendation  to  the  free-holders  of  the  city."  A  call  was 
then  issued  for  a  general  meeting  of  the  citizens  "  to  concur  in 
the  nomination  or  choose  others."  At  this  general  meeting  the 
Committee  of  Correspondence  was  authorized  to  appoint  a  com- 
mittee to  confer  with  a  similar  committee  from  the  Mechanics' 
Club  in  regard  to  arrangements  for  taking  a  vote  in  the  different 
wards ;  and  as  a  result  of  this  conference,  July  28th  was  ap- 
pointed for  the  election.  Before  the  election  the  candidates  for 
delegates  originally  nominated  by  the  Committee  of  Correspon- 
dence, having  subscribed  to  the  non-importation  agreement, 

22  Frothingham,  History  of  the  Siege  of  Boston,  29. 

23  Very  similar  to  the  Republican  Assembly  District  Associations  in  New  York 
city  at  the  present  time. 

84  This  was  simply  an  expedient  for  attaining  the  same  end  that  we  now  aim  to 
secure  by  the  party  check-list  and  the  challenging  of  doubtful  voters,  namely,  the 
prevention  of  members  of  the  opposite  party  from  participating  in  the  meeting. 


12  THE  NOMINATING  SYSTEM.  [CHAP.  I. 

received  the  indorsement  of  the  Mechanics'  Club,  and  were 
subsequently  unanimously  elected  at  the  polls.26 

5.  The  Post-Revolutionary  Caucus.  By  the  beginning  of  the 
Revolution  the  caucus  or  primary  had  become  pretty  well 
established  in  New  England  and  the  Middle  States.  With  the 
close  of  the  war  it  gradually  lost  its  secret  character,  which  had 
been  rendered  necessary  by  the  exigencies  of  the  time,  and  be- 
came a  miniature  town-meeting  of  the  party  voters  of  the  ward 
or  district.  In  New  England,  except  in  some  of  the  large  cities, 
and  in  those  sections  of  the  country  settled  by  New  England 
people,  the  caucus  still  retains  its  original  town-meeting  char- 
acter ;  but  in  the  other  States,  with  the  growth  of  population, 
the  "  primary "  has  come  to  be  a  mere  polling  place  for  the 
election  of  delegates  to  the  various  conventions,  and  of  members 
of  the  local  party  committee,  there  being  no  opportunity  what- 
ever for  any  discussion  of  the  merits  of  the  various  candidates. 
The  inevitable  result  has  been  that  the  real  work  of  nomination 
has  largely  fallen  either  into  the  hands  of  "  parlor  caucuses,"  w 
or  of  political  committees  and  clubs, — the  power  of  the  indi- 
vidual voter  being  restricted  to  a  choice  between  candidates 
agreed  upon  at  such  preliminary  secret  conferences,  or  named 
by  such  organizations. 

Human  nature,  however,  has  not  changed  very  much  in  the 
last  hundred  years,  and  so-called  "  modern  "  political  methods 
are  nothing  new  after  all.  For  instance,  in  the  "  Minutes  of  the 
Supreme  Executive  Council  of  Pennsylvania,"  for  1782,  we  find 
the  consideration  of  certain  alleged  frauds  in  the  election  of  a 
councillor  for  the  county  of  Philadelphia,  at  which  the  State 
militia  stationed  there  at  the  time  had  been  allowed  to  vote. 
According  to  a  minority  report  of  certain  members  of  the 
Council,  it  appears  that  "  tickets  were  formed  by  the  officers 
without  the  consent  of  the  privates  only  on  the  morning  of  the 

*  See  Memorial  History  of  New  York,  II.  438-41 ;  also  John  C.  Hamilton, 
Life  of  Alexander  Hamilton  (last  ed.),  I.  54-7. 

38  The  reader  is  not  to  infer  that  there  are  no  parlor  caucuses  in  New  England  ; 
but  where  the  caucus  is  a  small  body,  and  opportunity  is  afforded  for  public  dis- 
cussion of  the  merits  of  candidates,  there  is  always  a  chance  of  breaking  a  "  slate  " 
made  at  a  previous  parlor  caucus,  which  does  not  exist  where  the  primary  is  simply 
a  polling  place. 


SECT.  6.]    CONGRESSIONAL  NOMINATING  CAUCUS.  13 

election,  or  even  after  that  time,  and  that  the  greatest  part  of 
the  militia  who  voted  at  the  election  voted  under  the  orders  of 
General  Lacey."  From  various  pieces  of  evidence,  particularly 
the  fact  that  those  soldiers  who  voted  the  "  regular  "  ticket  were 
given  permission  to  return  to  their  homes,  the  gentlemen  sign- 
ing the  minority  report  concluded  that  the  election  in  question 
was  not  "  free  and  voluntary,"  as  prescribed  by  the  State  Con- 
stitution, and  consequently  was  unconstitutional  and  void.27  The 
interesting  thing  for  us  in  the  whole  matter  is  the  fact  of  a  secret 
caucus  of  the  officers  for  the  nomination  of  a  "  ticket "  or  list 
of  candidates,  accompanied  by  bribery  of  the  private  soldiers  at 
the  polls ;  this  shows  that  "  machine  politics "  existed  at  that 
early  time,  and  that  the  professional  politicians  of  our  day  had 
their  progenitors  among  the  Revolutionary  fathers. 

6.  The  Early  Congressional  Nominating  Caucus,  1788-1804.  The 
adoption  of  the  Federal  Constitution  of  1787  introduced  for 
the  first  time  the  election  of  national  officers.  In  1788  and 
again  in  1792  Washington  was  the  sole  candidate  for  the 
Presidency,  being  nominated,  as  it  were,  by  general  consent. 
In  regard  to  the  Vice-Presidency,  in  1788  there  was  no  pre- 
vious agreement,  as  is  shown  by  the  scattering  votes  in  the 
electoral  colleges.  In  1792,  however,  although  there  is  no 
evidence  of  any  meeting,  public  or  private,  it  was  generally 
understood  that  the  electors  opposed  to  Hamilton's  financial 
policy  would  vote  for  George  Clinton.  The  existence  of  such 
an  understanding  is  proved  by  the  fact  that  there  were  only 
four  scattering  votes  for  Vice-President,  all  the  rest  of  the 
electors  voting  either  for  Adams  or  Clinton. 

In  1796,  there  is  no  conclusive  evidence  that  any  formal 
meeting  was  held  by  the  members  of  Congress  of  either  party. 
Adams  and  Jefferson,  however,  were  the  recognized  candi- 
dates of  the  Federalist  and  Republican  parties  for  the  Presi- 
dency. But  although  Adams  was  designated  by  general 
consent  of  his  party,  nevertheless  there  appears  to  have  been 
some  secret  electioneering  on  the  part  of  Hamilton  to  frustrate 
the  wishes  of  the  great  mass  of  the  Federalists.  The  chief 
ground  for  this  belief  is  the  positive  statement  of  John  Adams. 

37  Pennsylvania  Colonial  Records,  XIII.  222-32. 


I4  THE  NOMINA  TING  SYSTEM.  [CHAP.  I. 

In  1808,  in  speaking  of  the  institution  of  the  caucus  in 
general,  he  says: 

"Alexander  Hamilton  was  the  greatest  organist  that  ever 
played  upon  this  instrument.  He  made  all  the  use  he  could 
of  those  bodies  of  Cincinnati  and  others,  to  prevent  Mr. 
Adams  from  being  chosen  Vice-President.  ...  At  the  second 
election,  he  was  pleased  to  permit  Mr.  Adams  to  have  a  con- 
siderable majority  as  Vice-President.  At  the  third  election 
he  intrigued  with  all  his  might  to  get  Major  Thomas  Pinckney 
chosen  President."28 

Whether  Hamilton's  intrigues  included  the  calling  of  a 
caucus  of  the  members  of  Congress,  such  as  Adams  says  that 
he  did  call  in  1800,  does  not  appear.  There  is,  however,  some 
evidence  of  a  Republican  caucus  in  1796,  in  the  fact  that 
Aaron  Burr  received  the  votes  of  five  entire  States  for  the 
Vice-Presidency,  showing  the  existence  of  some  previous 
understanding.29  Moreover,  one  of  the  chief  reasons  urged  for 
the  holding  of  a  caucus  in  1800  was  the  complaint  made  by 
the  Northern  Republicans  that  Burr  had  not  been  supported 
in  1796  "as  he  ought  to  have  been  "  by  the  party  in  the  South. 
This  shows  clearly  that  Burr  was  understood  to  be  the  "  regu- 
lar" party  candidate.80 

Whatever  may  have  been  the  case  in  1796,  the  evidence  is 
clear  that  in  1800  the  candidates  of  both  the  Republican  and 
Federalist  parties  were  nominated  at  a  caucus  of  the  party 
members  of  the  two  Houses  of  Congress.  The  Republican 
caucus,  which  was  strictly  private,  and  the  proceedings  of 
which  were  never  published,81  is  said  to  have  been  held  in 
May,  1800,  at  Marache's  boarding-house  in  Philadelphia,  and 
to  have  been  attended  by  forty-three  Republican  members  of 
Congress  "  besides  many  distinguished  citizens. "  **  According 

»  John  Adams,  Works,  VI.  543. 

"  The  States  were  Pennsylvania,  Maryland,  North  Carolina,  Kentucky,  and 
Tennessee. 

*>    See  Niles's  Register,  XXV.  258. 

81  Niles  says  that  if  the  proceedings  had  been  published  (or  written),  a  copy 
ought  to  have  appeared  among  the  papers  in  his  possession ;  but  in  spite  of  the 
most  painstaking  search  he  failed  to  find  one.  See  Niles' s  Register,  XXV.  258. 

«  Niltts  Register,  XXVII.  66. 


SECT.  6.]    CONGRESSIONAL  NOMINATING  CAUCUS.  15 

to  another  account,  there  were  present  thirty-seven  representa- 
tives and  nine  senators.33  In  speaking  of  this  caucus  in  1824, 
Senator  Smith  of  Maryland  said:  "It  was  believed  that  his 
success34  was  owing  to  want  of  a  conjoined  effort,  a  concentra- 
tion of  force  on  the  part  of  the  friends  of  Mr.  Jefferson.  A 
caucus  was  in  consequence  held  in  Philadelphia,  the  object 
of  which  was  to  make  a  conjoined  effort  to  concentrate  the 
strength  of  the  party  and  to  bind  each  to  the  other,  that  they 
would  use  their  best  exertions  to  promote  the  election  of  Mr. 
Jefferson.  I  did  not  attend,  but  I  believe  that  every  other 
member  of  either  House  friendly  to  Mr.  Jefferson  did 
attend. "  ®> 

This  deficiency  in  Senator  Smith's  testimony  is  partially 
made  up  by  Hammond,  the  careful  and  painstaking  historian 
of  the  politics  of  his  native  State  of  New  York.  According 
to  him,  there  appear  to  have  been  two  caucuses  held,  or  rather 
two  meetings  of  the  same  caucus  (i.  e.,  a  caucus  and  an 
adjourned  caucus).  At  the  first,  it  was  agreed  that  the  candi- 
date for  Vice-President  should  be  taken  from  New  York. 
But  as  the  members  of  the  caucus  were  ignorant,  of  the  wishes 
of  the  New  York  Republicans,  they  requested  Mr.  Gallatin  to 
communicate  with  the  latter.  Accordingly,  Gallatin  wrote  a 
letter  to  Commodore  Nicholson  of  New  York,  requesting  him 
to  "  converse  frankly  and  freely  with  the  gentlemen  who  had 
been  named  as  candidates,"  and  after  consultation  with  others 
to  inform  him  (Gallatin)  of  the  result  of  his  inquiries.  The 
Commodore,  after  looking  over  the  field,  arrived  at  the  con- 
clusion that  Governor  Clinton  would  be  the  most  available 
candidate,  and  was  upon  the  point  of  sending  a  letter  recom- 
mending him  to  the  Congressional  Caucus;  but  before  he  sent 
the  letter  he  showed  it  to  Burr,  who  expressed  himself  as  dis- 
satisfied with  the  recommendation,  and,  after  some  consulta- 
tion with  him  and  his  friends,  Clinton's  name  was  erased  and 
that  of  Burr  inserted  in  its  place.36  On  the  arrival  of  the 

83  Extract  from  a  paper  known  as  the  Democratic  Press,  printed  in  the  National 
Intelligencer,  and  commented  on  in  Niles's  Register,  XXV.  402. 

84  This  refers  to  Adams'  election  in  1796. 

85  Benton,  Abridgement  of  the  Debates  of  Congress,  VII.  532. 

88  History  of  Political  Parties  in  the  State  of  New  York,  I.  138. 


!6  THE  NOMINATING  SYSTEM.  [CHAP.  I. 

Commodore's  letter  at  Philadelphia,  a  second  meeting  of  the 
Congressional  caucus  was  held,  at  which  Burr  was  nominated 
as  the  Republican  candidate  for  Vice-President. 

In  regard  to  the  Federalist  caucus  of  1800,  our  information 
is  very  meagre.  It  is  pretty  certain,  however,  that  such  a  meet- 
ing was  held,  probably  in  the  Senate  chamber,  in  the  early 
part  of  i8oo.87  Whatever  its  proceedings,  it  drew  down  upon 
itself  the  anathemas  of  Benjamin  Austin,  a  prominent  Massa- 
chusetts Republican.  "  If  anything  will  arouse  the  freemen  of 
America,"  said  he,  "it  must  be  the  arrogance  of  a  number  of 
members  of  Congress  to  assemble  as  an  electioneering  caucus 
to  control  the  citizens  in  their  rights.  .  .  .  Under  what 
authority  did  these  men  pretend  to  dictate  their  nomination? 
.  .  .  Do  we  send  members  to  Congress  to  cabal  once  in  four 
years  for  President?  Or  are  we  arrived  at  such  a  pitch  of 
Congressional  influence  that  what  they  decide  on  is  to  be  bind- 
ing on  the  United  States?  Is  there  any  paragraph  in  the 
Constitution  which  gives  them  such  an  authority  or  even  coun- 
tenances such  a  proceeding?  After  Congress  have  accom- 
plished their  legislative  business  have  they  a  right  to  dictate 
in  the  choice  of  an  executive?  If  so,  what  an  imposition  on 
'  the  people '  to  talk  about  the  freedom  of  election,  or  what 
consequence  is  it  that  the  State  legislature  should  concern 
themselves  in  the  mode  of  choosing  electors.  .  .  .  "x 

Although,  as  we  have  seen,  caucuses  of  members  of  Congress 
for  the  purpose  of  nominating  candidates  for  the  Presidency 
and  Vice- Presidency  were  held  in  1800  and  probably  in  1796, 
it  was  not  until  1804  that  the  first  regularly  called  caucus  for 
that  purpose  took  place.89  From  that  time  until  1824,  the 
Congressional  caucus  was  the  regular  nominating  machinery.40 

91  See  quotation  from  the  Aurora  in  McMaster,  History  of  the  People  of  the 
United  States,  II.  462-3;  see  also  John  Adams,  Works,  VI.  543,  544. 

88  Constitutional  Republicanism  as  opposed  to  Fallacious  Federalism,  &c.  (Boston, 
1803),  87,  88.  Although  aimed  at  the  Federalist  party,  Mr.  Austin's  criticism 
evidently  applied  with  equal  force  to  the  Congressional  caucuses  of  his  own  party. 

»  Niles's  Register,  XXV.  258. 

*°  Throughout  this  period  the  party  candidates  for  presidential  electors  in  the 
different  States  were  all  nominated  by  a  joint  caucus  of  the  party  members  of  the 
legislature.  E.  g.,  see  Benton,  Abridgement,  V.  in  and  117,  118;  Nileft  Register, 
II.  3*1  X.  16,  64;  XVII.  423;  XXVII.  164. 


SECT.  7.]    CONTINUANCE  OF  CONGRESSIONAL  CAUCUS.     17 

The  organization  and  procedure  of  such  a  caucus  were  the  same 
as  that  of  a  joint  caucus  of  the  party  members  of  the  two 
Houses  of  a  State  legislature  of  the  present  day,  held  for  the 
nomination  of  a  candidate  for  United  States  senator.41 

7.  Continuance  of  the  Congressional  Caucus,  1804-1824.  From 
the  beginning  the  caucus  had  to  encounter  opposition  such  as 
was  voiced  by  Austin.  The  assumption  by  Senator  Bradley 
of  the  right,  as  chairman  of  the  caucus  of  1804,  to  call  a 
similar  caucus  in  1808,  aroused  considerable  opposition  at  the 
time,  but  it  soon  subsided.42  Again  in  1812,  the  bolting 
"Peace  Republicans,"  in  their  address  in  favor  of  the  candi- 
dacy of  De  Witt  Clinton,  declared  that  "the  nomination  of  a 
candidate  for  the  Presidency  of  the  United  States  by  an  asso- 
ciation of  members  of  Congress,  convened  at  the  seat  of  govern- 
ment, is  hostile  to  the  spirit  of  the  federal  constitution, 
dangerous  to  the  rights  of  the  people,  and  to  the  freedom  of 
election."43  Two  years  later,  in  1814,  Mr.  Gaston  of  North 
Carolina  made  a  most  bitter  attack  on  the  Congressional 
caucus  system,  denouncing  it  as  a  direct  violation  of  the  spirit 
of  the  Constitution.44 

The  result  of  the  Republican  caucus  of  1816,  however,  did 
more  than  anything  else  to  arouse  the  mass  of  the  people 
against  the  system.  William  H.  Crawford,  a  man  whom 
the  people  at  large  had  never  thought  of  for  President,  came 
near  to  receiving  the  Republican  caucus  nomination,  which  was 
at  that  time  equivalent  to  an  election ;  and  this  seems  to  have 
excited  alarm  even  in  the  minds  of  some  who,  eight  years 
later,  were  the  most  strenuous  advocates  of  the  caucus  system. 
For  example,  the  "National  Intelligencer"  of  April  8,  1816, 
in  a  very  outspoken  editorial  upon  the  subject,  said :  "  So 
strongly  impressed,  indeed,  are  we  with  the  conviction  that 
the  sense  of  the  people  was  not  truly  represented  in  that  meet- 

41  See  chapter  iv.  §  8,  of  the  present  volume. 

42  See  Niles's  Register,  XXV.  244. 

48  Niles's  Register,  III.  17.  De  Witt  Clinton  was  nominated  for  the  Presidency 
by  a  caucus  of  the  Republican  members  of  the  New  York  Legislature.  He  was 
subsequently  chosen  as  the  Federalist  candidate  at  an  irregular  convention  of  Fed- 
eralist delegates  from  the  different  States,  held  in  New  York  City. 

44  Benton,  Abridgement,  V.  113-5. 

2 


!8  THE  NOMINATING  SYSTEM.  [CHAP.  I. 

ing,  from  whatever  causes,  that  our  confidence  in  the  expe- 
diency of  this  mode  of  collecting  the  general  sentiment  is 
shaken,  —  we  had  almost  said  destroyed.  .  .  .  Should  the  day 
unfortunately  ever  arrive  when  a  nomination  should  be  made 
averse  to  the  public  sentiment,  the  evil  of  this  system  will  be 
felt."46 

With  the  "  Era  of  Good  Feeling  "  there  came  a  lull  in  the 
opposition  to  the  Congressional  caucus,  but  towards  the  latter 
part  of  the  summer  of  1822  the  latent  hostility  broke  out 
afresh.  The  first  gun  was  the  nomination  of  Andrew  Jackson 
for  the  Presidency  by  an  informal  meeting  of  the  members  of 
the  Tennessee  Legislature  in  August.46  The  friends  of  Jackson 
thus  announced  that  they  would  not  be  bound  by  a  Congres- 
sional caucus,  but  that  they  proposed  to  substitute  another 
mode  of  nomination.  Their  example  was  followed  by  the 
friends  of  Clay,  who  nominated  their  favorite  at  a  similar 
meeting  of  the  members  of  the  Kentucky  Legislature,  held  in 
November.47  From  this  time  on  Jackson,  Clay,  Adams,  and 
even  Crawford,  at  different  times,  were  formally  nominated 
either  by  State  legislatures  acting  in  their  official  capacity,  or 
by  State  legislative  caucuses. 

An  exciting  controversy  between  the  friends  and  the  oppo- 
nents of  the  Congressional  caucus  now  began  to  be  waged  both 
in  the  newspaper  press  and  elsewhere.  The  system  was 
defended  by  the  "American  Sentinel"  of  Philadelphia,  the 
"Richmond  Enquirer,"  and  other  ultra-Republican  organs; 
while  the  principal  opponent  on  the  part  of  the  newspaper 
press  was  "Niles's  Register." 

In  April,  1823,  a  caucus  of  the  Republican  members  of  the 
New  York  Legislature  adopted  a  set  of  resolutions  urging  the 
holding  of  a  Congressional  caucus  in  I824-48  In  October 
the  opponents  of  the  system  adopted  the  same  tactics.  The 
Tennessee  Legislature,  in  its  official  capacity,  passed  resolu- 

46  For  other  attacks  upon  the  system  made  at  this  time,  see  speech  by  Repre- 
sentative Hammond  of  New  York,  Benton's  Abridgement,  V.  678-9;  also  the 
resolutions  adopted  by  the  House  of  Delegates  of  the  Maryland  Legislature,  Niles't 
Register,  XI.  314,  315. 

«•  Niles's  Register,  XXII.  402. 

«  Ibid.,  XXIII.  245.  «•  Ibid.,  XXIV.  135,  136. 


SECT.  7.]     CONTINUANCE  OF  CONGRESSIONAL  CAUCUS.     19 

tions  condemning  the  caucus  system  in  the  most  violent  terms 
as  "  inexpedient,  impolitic,  and  against  the  spirit  of  the 
Constitution."49  Similar  resolutions  were  adopted  by  the 
legislatures  of  Maryland50  and  Alabama.51  On  the  other 
hand,  the  system  was  defended  by  legislative  caucuses  of  the 
Republican  members  in  Maine52  and  Virginia.53 

In  addition  to  the  hostile  action  of  State  legislatures,  mass 
meetings  of  the  people  were  held  all  over  the  country  at  which 
resolutions  were  passed  denouncing  the  caucus  system,  and 
calling  upon  members  of  Congress  not  to  attend  such  a  caucus 
in  I824.54  Strengthened  by  this  outburst  of  public  sentiment, 
the  slumbering  opposition  in  Congress  itself  broke  out  with 
renewed  vigor.  Early  in  January,  1824,  fourteen  of  the 
Republican  members  from  Pennsylvania  issued  an  address  to 
their  constituents  giving  their  reasons  for  refusing  to  attend  a 
Congressional  caucus;  although,  unlike  their  colleagues  from 
other  States,  many  of  them  had  not  been  instructed  to  that 
effect.55  Towards  the  end  of  January,  1824,  according  to 
John  Quincy  Adams,  Mr.  Ingham  of  Pennsylvania  called  a 
meeting  to  form  an  anti-caucus  organization,  at  which  it  was 
voted  to  canvass  both  Houses  of  Congress  in  order  to  ascertain 
the  sentiment  of  the  members  on  the  caucus  question.56 

By  the  first  of  February  it  became  evident  that  a  large 
majority  of  the  members  were  opposed  to  the  holding  of  a 
caucus,  and  that  they  would  not  attend  one  if  held.  The 
friends  of  William  H.  Crawford,  however,  were  determined 
that  such  a  meeting  should  be  held,  and  a  call  was  issued  on 
February  6th,  signed  by  eleven  members  of  Congress.57  In 
accordance  with  this  call,  a  caucus  was  held  on  the  evening  of 
February  I4th,  in  the  Representatives'  chamber.  Out  of  two 
hundred  and  sixteen  Republican  members  only  sixty-six 
attended,  practically  all  of  whom  were  friends  of  Mr.  Crawford; 

«  Niles's  Register,  XXV.  137-9. 

«  Ibid.,  260.  81  Ibid.,  308. 

62  Ibid.,  370.  M  Ibid.,  292. 

64  Ibid.,  XXV.  17,  18,  40,  41,  130,  167,  242,  243,  258,  and  385. 

66  Ibid.,  XXV.  306,  307. 

66  Memoirs  of  John  Quincy  Adams,  VI.  235,  236. 

67  National  Intelligencer,  February  7,  1824. 


20  THE  A'OMINA  TING  SYSTEM.  [CHAP.  I. 

and  that  gentleman  received  all  except  four  of  the  votes  cast 
for  a  candidate  for  President.68  Although  the  caucus  of  1824 
issued  an  address  to  the  Republicans  of  the  United  States, 
defending  the  system  and  urging  them  to  support  the  caucus 
nominee,  it  was  evident  that  the  Congressional  caucus  system 
was  a  moribund  institution.  At  the  election  in  November  the 
people  repudiated  it  at  the  polls,  and  no  serious  attempt  was 
ever  made  to  revive  it.58  In  the  campaign  of  1828,  which  was 
commenced  almost  immediately  after  the  inauguration  of 
Adams,  the  candidates  were  nominated  by  State  legislatures, 
State  legislative  caucuses,  public  meetings,  and  by  irregular 
conventions  of  the  people.80  In  1832,  with  improved  means 
of  transportation,  this  confused  and  irregular  system  of  State 
nomination  gave  way  to  the  national  convention,  which  is  in 
vogue  to-day. 

Adopted  at  the  time  of  the  bitter  struggle  between  the 
Republican  and  Federalist  parties  as  the  only  practicable 
method  of  uniting  a  national  party  upon  a  single  candidate, 
the  Congressional  caucus  was  tolerated  by  the  people  so  long 
as  it  resulted  in  the  nomination  of  able  men,  —  so  long  as  it 
followed  and  did  not  attempt  to  lead  public  opinion.  Just  as 
soon,  however,  as  it  presumed  to  dictate  to  the  people,  the  peo- 
ple discovered  that  they  had  no  voice  in  the  nomination,  and 
thereafter  the  system  was  doomed.  The  friends  of  Jackson, 
Adams,  and  Clay  were  quick  to  seize  upon  this  growing 
unpopularity  of  the  system,  and  to  turn  it  to  the  disadvantage 
of  Crawford,  their  common  rival,  who  relied  for  success 
entirely  upon  the  caucus  nomination.  The  downfall  of  the 
system  was  hastened  by  the  obliteration  of  party  lines,  and 
by  the  fact  that  the  caucus  candidate  was  the  least  popular  of 
the  four  aspirants  to  the  Presidency.  Again,  one  failure  to 
unite  the  party  upon  a  single  candidate  was  sufficient  to 

66  For  a  description  of  this  caucus  the  reader  is  referred  to  Wilts'*  Register,  XXV. 
388-92,  and  403.  It  is  to  be  noted  that  the  old  Federalist  party  had  entirely  dis- 
appeared, and  that  all  the  members  of  Congress,  with  the  exception  of  a  few  from 
some  of  the  old  Federalist  States,  were  nominally  members  of  the  Republican 
party. 

»  See  Mies' s  Register,  LXII.  357. 

*•  Ibid.,  passim. 


SECT.  8.]  COAVVENTION  IN  PENNSYLVANIA.  2l 

destroy  a  system  which  had  been  tolerated  only  for  its  sup- 
posed efficacy  in  accomplishing  that  result.  During  the  years 
1822  and  1823  the  people  became  accustomed  to  new  and  more 
democratic  modes  of  nomination,  and  it  was  against  the  nature 
of  things  that  they  should  be  content  with  the  old  oligarchical 
method  of  Congressional  dictation.  If  we  look  at  the  Con- 
gressional caucus  in  the  light  of  history,  our  wonder  is  not 
that  the  system  fell  in  1824,  but  rather  that  for  so  many  years 
it  was  permitted  to  retain  the  power  of  disposing  of  the  highest 
office  in  the  gift  of  the  American  people. 

8.  Development  of  the  Nominating  Convention  in  Pennsylvania. 
In  the  early  days  of  the  republic  nominations  for  local  officers 
and  for  State  and  national  officers  chosen  by  districts,  except 
where  the  system  of  self-announced  candidacy  prevailed,  were 
made  at  mass  meetings  of  the  party  voters  of  the  town  or 
district.  As  population  increased,  these  meetings  gradually 
developed  into  irregular  conventions  of  self-appointed  dele- 
gates, and  from  thence  into  regular  nominating  conventions 
such  as  exist  to-day.  This  development,  which  was  practically 
the  same  in  all  the  States,  may  perhaps  be  best  shown  by 
taking  two  States  as  examples,  namely,  Pennsylvania  and 
Massachusetts. 

In  Pennsylvania  we  find  that  in  the  fall  of  1789,  a  public 
meeting  of  the  Federalist  voters  of  Philadelphia  was  held  in 
the  State  House  yard  to  nominate  candidates  for  the  State 
legislature.61  In  1794,  candidates  for  Congress  and  for 
members  of  both  branches  of  the  State  legislature  for  the 
county  of  Philadelphia  were  nominated  "at  a  large  and  respect- 
able meeting  of  the  Freemen,  .  .  .  held  at  widow  Lether's  in 
Germantown,"62  evidently  an  irregular  county  convention. 
Similar  conventions  were  held  in  the  other  counties  of  the 
State,  at  which  a  candidate  for  governor  was  also  sometimes 
nominated,  although  the  so-called  "nomination"  of  a  candidate 

61  Pennsylvania  and  the  Federal  Constitution,  edited   by  McMaster   and  Stone 
(Phila.  1888),  9. 

62  Gazette  of  the  United  States,  Oct.  3,  1794.     At  a  similar  meeting  in  1796,  a 
complete  ticket  for  both  branches  of  the  City  Council  was  nominated.     See  Gazette 
of  the  U.  S.,  Sept.  30,  1796. 


22  THE  NOMINATING  SYSTEM.  [CHAP.  I. 

for  governor  was  in  reality  nothing  but  a  ratification  of  the 
action  of  a  previous  State  legislative  caucus  or  convention. 
These  irregular  meetings  of  self-appointed  delegates  very 
soon,  however,  developed  into  regular  conventions  composed 
of  a  fixed  number  of  delegates  chosen  at  primary  meetings  in 
the  various  towns  and  wards.  For  instance,  in  1799,  we  find 
that  "at  a  meeting  of  citizens  of  the  city  of  Philadelphia  at 
Dunwoody's  tavern  a  committee  of  three  from  each  ward  was 
appointed  "  to  attend  a  county  convention  to  nominate  a  candi- 
date for  senator.63  In  1800,  a  Congressional  district  conven- 
tion for  the  district  comprising  the  counties  of  Bucks, 
Montgomery,  and  Wayne  was  held  at  Easton,  composed  of  five 
delegates  from  each  county,  chosen  by  the  county  conventions.64 
About  1800,  we  begin  to  find  published  calls  for  these  con- 
ventions in  the  newspapers.  At  first  the  calls  were  anony- 
mous, but  with  the  rise  of  permanent  party  organizations  they 
came  to  be  signed  by  the  chairman  and  secretary  of  the  district 
committee.  The  following  is  a  sample  of  one  of  the  earlier 
published  calls: 

The  Federal  Republicans  of  Chester  County  are  requested  to  meet 
in  the  respective  townships  of  said  county  on  Saturday  the  1 1  th  day  of 
September  next,  in  order  to  choose  two  suitable  persons  in  each  Town- 
ship to  meet  in  General  Committee  at  a  County  Meeting  to  be  held  at 
the  Court  House  in  West  Chester  on  Tuesday  the  i4th  day  of  Septem- 
ber ensuing,  to  nominate  suitable  persons  for  Senator,  Representatives, 
and  other  officers  for  said  county  the  ensuing  year.  Also  to  appoint 
two  Conferees  to  meet  at  the  house  of  John  Houston  in  Church  Town, 
Lancaster  County,  on  Saturday  the  25th  of  September,  with  such  other 
conferees  as  may  be  appointed  by  the  counties  of  Lancaster  and  Berks 
to  fix  on  three  suitable  persons  for  Representatives  in  Congress. 

August  17,  i8o2.w 

From  the  foregoing  evidence,  it  appears  to  be  plain  that  by 
the  beginning  of  the  present  century  in  the  case  of  all  elective 
officers,  except  those  voted  for  by  the  people  of  the  State  at 
large,  the  Convention  system  was  firmly  established  in 

M  Claypoole,  American  Daily  Advertiser,  Aug.  22,  1799. 
•*   The  American  Eagle,  Easton,  Pa.,  July  17,  1800. 
•»  Gatette  of  the  United  States,  Aug.  27,  1802. 


SECT.  9.]        THE  CONVENTION  IN  MASSACHUSETTS.         23 

Pennsylvania  on  substantially  the  same  lines  as  we  find 
to-day.  Although  at  first  considerable  irregularity  existed, 
the  system  very  soon  settled  down  to  its  present  orderly 
arrangement.66 

9.  Development  of  the  Convention  in  Massachusetts.  Although 
during  the  Revolutionary  period  Massachusetts  took  the  lead 
in  political  organization,  nevertheless  during  the  years  imme- 
diately following  the  adoption  of  the  Constitution  she  appears 
to  have  fallen  behind  Pennsylvania  in  this  respect.  The  lack 
of  party  organization  is  shown  by  the  large  number  of  candi- 
dates for  each  office,  many  of  whom  were  put  in  nomination 
by  a  personal  letter  from  some  friend  or  admirer  addressed  to 
the  editor  of  some  party  paper.  The  following  is  an  example 
of  this  peculiar  and  interesting  mode  of  nomination: 

To  THE  FREE  ELECTORS  OF  THE  THREE  FIRST  DISTRICTS. 

FELLOW  CITIZENS  :  —  With  a  right  idea  of  the  delicacy  of  the  meas- 
ure, but  with  a  sincere  reliance  on  your  known  candour,  I  beg  the  indul- 
gence of  mentioning  the  Hon.  David  Cobb  Esquire  as  a  candidate  for 
your  suffrages  as  a  Representative  in  Congress  for  the  three  districts  at 
large,  &c. 

(Signed)  AN  ELECTOR.67 

These  epistles,  many  of  them  nominating  whole  tickets  of 
congressmen  and  Presidential  electors,  were  signed  by  such 
names  as  "A  Farmer,"  "Whole  Truth,"  "Fidelitas," 
"Candidus,"  "Middlesex,"  "Union,"  "Freeman,"  etc. 

In  October,  1794,  we  find  that  at  a  caucus  of  the  Republican 
voters  of  the  Boston  district,  Dr.  Jarvis  was  nominated  as  the 
Republican  candidate  for  Congress  against  Fisher  Ames. 
According  to  Republican  authority  there  were  seven  hundred 
voters  present  at  the  caucus,  while  the  Federalist  papers 

66  In  September,   1811,  the   Democratic   Convention   of  Philadelphia   County 
adopted  a  resolution   (i.  e.  a  party  rule)  that  nominations  for  all  offices  except 
judges  and  inspectors  of  election  should  be  made  by  a  delegate  convention  com- 
posed of  delegates  chosen  at  the  ward  meetings,  each  of  the  larger  wards  to  be 
entitled  to  five,  and  the  smaller  wards  to  three  delegates.     This  action  of  the  Con- 
vention was  subsequently  ratified  by  mass  meetings  of  the  voters.     (Aurora,  Sept 
20,  and  Oct.  15.  1811). 

67  Boston  Centinel,  Oct.  31,  1792. 


24  THE  NOMINATING  SYSTEM.  [CHAP.  I. 

asserted  that  there  were  not  more  than  one  hundred  present, 
and  that  the  nomination  was  in  reality  made  by  the  Boston 
"Jacobin  Club."68 

The  following  is  an  ultra-Federalist  account  of  a  Republican 
Congressional  Convention  held  at  Abington  in  1798: 

A  convention  of  Parisian  cut  throats  assembled  in  solemn  divan  at 
Abington  in  the  county  of  Plymouth  on  Monday  last,  for  the  purpose  of 
selecting  some  devotee  of  republicanized  France  as  a  candidate  for  the 
democratic  suffrages  in  this  District  for  Federal  Representative  at  the 
approaching  election.  They  were  convened  in  consequence  of  anony- 
mous circular  letters,  addressed  to  several  leading  characters  of  their 
party  in  the  several  towns  of  the  District  inviting  the  jacobin  interest  to 
delegate  certain  characters  of  their  brethren  to  meet  in  council  at  the 
aforementioned  place  and  for  the  above  purpose." 

The  writer  adds  that,  of  the  "self-created  delegates  "  from  a 
certain  town,  one  was  "  a  common  drunkard  that  would  barter 
the  freedom  of  his  country  for  a  dram ;  "  another  was  "  a  perfect 
Marat  not  only  in  personal  resemblance  but  in  character. " 

In  1802  both  the  Federalist  and  Republican  parties  held 
congressional  and  county  conventions  in  the  different  sections 
of  the  State,70  and  from  that  time  on  the  delegate  convention 
appears  to  have  been  the  prevailing  method  of  nomination  for 
all  district  officers.  These  conventions  were  at  first  called  by 
vote  of  a  caucus  in  some  one  city  or  town,  an  invitation  being 
extended  to  the  party  voters  of  the  other  cities  and  towns  in 
the  district  to  send  delegates  to  a  convention  to  be  held  at 
some  designated  time  and  place.71  Gradually,  however,  with 
the  growth  of  party  organizations,  as  in  Pennsylvania,  the  call 
came  to  be  issued  to  the  district  or  town  committee.  These 
committees  appear  in  some  instances  to  have  exercised  the 
function  of  nominating  the  party  candidates.72  For  instance, 

w  See  Centinel,  Nov.  i,  1794. 

w  Columbian  Centinel,  Oct.  17,  1798. 

70  See  Columbian  Centinel,  Sept.  18,  ft  seq. 

71  The  Federalists  of  Suffolk  County,  however,  continued  for  many  years  to 
nominate  their  ticket  for  State  Senators  and  county  officers  at  a  mass  meeting  or 
county  caucus  held  at  Concert  Hall  in  Boston. 

72  Independent  Chronicle,  Sept.  26,  1 808. 


SECT.  io.]    NOMINATIONS  BY  LEGISLATIVE  CAUCUS.         25 

we  find  that  in  1820,  Benjamin  Gorham  was  nominated  as  the 
Republican  candidate  for  Congress  from  the  Boston  district 
by  the  Republican  city  committee,  composed  as  at  present  of 
the  members  of  the  different  ward  committees.73  The  nomi- 
nation, however,  was  subsequently  ratified  by  a  "general 
caucus  "  of  the  party  voters  of  the  district.  This  method  of 
nomination  by  district  committees  still  exists  to-day.  Even 
in  Massachusetts,  where  the  primary  caucus  is  most  carefully 
guarded,  it  frequently  happens  that  in  those  city  districts 
where  a  party  is  in  a  decided  minority,  the  caucus  leaves 
the  selection  of  candidates  for  representative  to  the  ward 
committee. 

In  the  early  conventions  it  was  usual  in  Massachusetts,  as 
elsewhere,  to  pass  a  vote  that  the  proceedings  of  the  conven- 
tion be  published  in  the  leading  party  organ,  signed  by  the 
chairman  and  secretary.74  The  first  case  found  in  which  the 
call  for  a  convention  prescribed  the  exact  number  of  delegates 
to  which  each  town  was  entitled  in  the  convention,  was  in 
1808.  The  practice  of  "snap  conventions"  appears  to  have 
originated  early,  for  in  1828  we  find  complaint  that  the  Middle- 
sex County  Convention  was  not  properly  advertised.75 

io.  State  Nominations  by  Legislative  Caucus.  In  regard  to 
the  officers  elected  by  the  people  of  a  State  at  large,  viz.,  the 
governor  and  lieutenant-governor,76  the  method  of  nomination 
underwent  a  curious  development.  During  the  years  imme- 
diately following  the  adoption  of  the  Constitution,  candidates 
for  governor  were  nominated  at  a  meeting  of  party  voters  from 
the  different  parts  of  the  State,  held  at  the  principal  city,  — a 
sort  of  State  caucus  or  primary.  Owing  to  the  difficulty  and 
expense  of  travelling  in  those  days,  the  number  of  persons 
from  distant  parts  of  the  State  was  necessarily  small,  and 

73  Columbian  Centinel,  Oct.  21,  1820. 

74  The  same  was  true  of  the  early  caucuses   and  primaries.     It  is  principally 
from  this  source  that  we  are  able  to  discover  the  mode  of  procedure  of  the  earlier 
nominating  bodies,  as  the  newspapers  themselves  are  singularly  lacking  in  accounts 
of  such  meetings. 

76  See  Independent  Chronicle,  March  19,  1828. 

76  The  other  executive  officers  of  the  State  were,  as  a  rule,  at  this  time  either 
appointed  by  the  governor,  or  elected  by  the  legislature. 


26  THE  NOMINATING  SYSTEM.  [CHAP.  I. 

hence  the  gathering  was  in  reality  a  State  convention  com- 
posed of  the  political  leaders  in  the  different  sections.  In 
Pennsylvania,  for  a  short  period,  the  two  parties  held  regularly 
called  State  conventions  composed,  as  at  present,  of  delegates 
chosen  by  the  party  voters  in  the  different  counties.77 

The  adoption  of  this  system  in  the  nomination  of  party 
candidates  was  natural,  as  the  people  were  familiar  with  the 
convention  in  the  framing  of  their  State  constitutions  as  well 
as  in  the  ratification  of  the  new  Federal  Constitution.  The 
first  period  of  the  State  convention,  however,  was  not  of  long 
duration.  Gradually  the  party  members  of  the  legislature 
usurped  the  power  of  nominating  the  State  ticket,  and  by 
i8oo78  the  Legislative  caucus  system  was  the  prevailing  method 
of  nomination.  This  adoption  of  a  less  democratic  method  is 
probably  to  be  accounted  for  by  the  difficulty  of  communica- 
tion between  different  parts  of  a  State.  In  State  as  well  as 
in  national  politics  the  Legislative  caucus  was  adopted  as  the 
easiest  method,  since  the  members  of  the  legislature  were 
already  assembled,  and  represented  most  sections  of  the  State. 
It  must  be  clearly  understood  that  so  far  from  the  Congres- 
sional caucus  being  adopted  in  imitation  of  the  method  in 
vogue  in  the  States,  it  was  generally,  as  in  other  matters  of 
legislative  procedure,  just  the  other  way;  the  Congressional 
caucus  preceded  in  point  of  time  that  of  the  State 
legislature.79 

77  The  first  regularly  called  State  convention  of  which  the  writer  has  been  able 
to  find  any  account  was  held  at  Harrisburg,  Pa.,  in  the  fall  of  1788.     See  Pennsyl- 
vania and  the  Federal  Constitution  (McMaster  and   Stone,    1888),  554;   see  also 
Pennsylvania  Gazette,  Nov.  26,  1788. 

78  The  first  nominating  legislative  caucus  in  New  York  was  held  in  1795  (S€e 
Hammond,  History  of  Political  Parties  in  the  State  of  New  York,  I.  90  ;  also  Jay, 
Life  and  Writings  of  John  Jay,  I.  355)  ;  the  first  caucus  of  a  similar  character  in 
Pennsylvania  occurred  in  1799    (Claypoole,  American   Daily  Advertiser,  Aug.  22, 
1799) ;  the  first  recorded  legislative  caucus  in  Massachusetts  was  held  in  1800  (see 
T.  C.  Amory,  Life  of  James  Sullivan,  II.  65). 

79  Throughout  the  legislative  caucus  period  the  casual  reader  of  the  newspapers 
may  easily  mistake  the  terms  used.     For  instance,  in  1808  the  Pennsylvania  papers 
have  a  great  deal  to  say  about  the  Democratic- Republican  State  "convention  "  of 
that  year,  at  Leicester.     The  true  character  of  the  body,  however,  is  shown  by  the 
first  sentence  of  the  proceedings,  viz. :  "  all  the  delegates  appointed  by  the  Demo- 
cratic citizens  of  the  several  counties  not  represented  in  the  general  assembly, 


SECT,  n.]    DECLINE  OF  THE  LEGISLATIVE  CAUCUS.         2/ 

These  legislative  caucuses  were  joint  caucuses  of  the  party 
members  of  both  branches  of  the  legislature,  and  their  pro- 
cedure was  exactly  the  same  as  that  of  similar  meetings  held 
at  the  present  time  for  the  nomination  of  candidates  for  the 
United  States  Senate.  Not  infrequently  prominent  members 
of  the  party  outside  of  the  legislature  were  allowed  to  attend 
and  to  take  part  in  the  proceedings,  and  it  was  not  uncommon 
for  the  preliminary  caucus  to  invite  those  towns  or  districts 
not  represented  in  the  legislature  by  members  belonging  to 
the  party  holding  the  caucus,  to  elect  delegates  to  attend  the 
final  nominating  meeting.  The  nominations  made  by  the 
Legislative  caucus  were  usually  ratified  by  district  conven- 
tions and  public  meetings  throughout  the  State,  the  ratifica- 
tion being  in  the  form  of  an  original  nomination. 

ii.  Decline  of  the  Legislative  Cancn*,  1811-1835.  Opposition 
to  the  Legislative  caucus  method  of  nomination  for  State 
officers  appears  to  have  been  contemporaneous  with  the  oppo- 
sition to  the  Congressional  caucus  in  national  politics.  The 
development  of  this  movement  which  finally  resulted  in  a 
general  adoption  of  the  State  convention  system  can  perhaps 
best  be  shown  by  an  example. 

In  New  York,  where  the  Legislative  caucus  appears  to  have 
been  first  adopted,  the  system  was  carried  to  an  extreme  not 
found  elsewhere.  Down  to  1811  the  Republican  candidates 
for  the  State  Senate  were  nominated  at  a  caucus  of  the  party 
members  of  the  State  assembly  from  each  senatorial  district. 
This  method,  however,  was  found  to  be  very  objectionable,  for 
the  reason  that  the  Republicans  living  in  districts  represented 
by  Federalist  assembly  men  had  no  voice  in  the  nomination. 
Accordingly,  about  1811  the  method  was  changed  in  favor  of 
nomination  by  District  conventions  composed  of  delegates 
chosen  at  primaries  in  the  different  cities  and  towns  in  the 
senatorial  district.80 

assembled  this  day  &c."  See  the  Aurora,  March  10,  1808.  It  is  to  be  noted  that 
the  terms  "  Republican,"  "  Democratic,"  and  "  Democratic-Republican  "  are  used 
interchangeably  in  the  newspapers  and  pamphlets  of  the  day  as  applying  to  the 
party  of  strict  construction,  of  which  Jefferson  was  the  leader.  The  opposing  party 
was  known  as  the  Federalist  party. 

80    Hammond,  History  of  Political  Parties  in  the  State  of  New  York,  I.  295. 


28  THE   NOMINATING  SYSTEM.  [CHAP.  I. 

The  first  movement  towards  a  State  convention  was  started 
by  the  Tammany  men  in  1812,  not  because  they  were  conscien- 
tiously opposed  to  the  old  system,  but  because  they  feared  that 
De  Witt  Clinton,  to  whom  they  were  bitterly  opposed,  would 
again  secure  the  regular  caucus  nomination  for  lieutenant- 
governor.  The  Legislative  caucus,  however,  resulted  in  the 
nomination  of  Taylor  over  Clinton,  and  the  agitation  for  a 
convention  seems  to  have  collapsed.81 

In  1814,  a  number  of  the  Federalist  members  of  the  legis- 
lature issued  a  call  for  a  State  Convention  at  Albany,  composed 
of  delegates  from  the  different  counties,  for  the  purpose  of 
determining  the  course  to  be  pursued  by  the  Federalist  party 
in  the  legislature.82  Although  this  convention  was  not  called 
for  the  purpose  of  nominating  a  State  ticket,  it  is  significant 
as  indicating  a  lack  of  faith  in  the  Legislative  caucus.  It  was 
not  until  1817  that  the  first  State  nominating  convention  was 
held,  and  even  this  was  not  a  true  convention  according  to 
present  standards,  but  a  mixed  body  composed  of  the  Repub- 
lican members  of  the  legislature,  together  with  delegates 
chosen  by  the  Republican  voters  in  those  counties  represented 
in  the  legislature  by  Federalist  members.83 

The  Legislative  caucus  system,  however,  appears  to  have 
possessed  great  vitality,  and  it  was  not  until  1824,  the  year  in 
which  the  Congressional  caucus  met  its  fate,  that  the  last 
State  Legislative  caucus  in  New  York  was  held.  A  faction 
of  the  Democratic  party  known  as  the  People's  Party,  dis- 
satisfied with  the  caucus  nomination  of  Colonel  Young  for 
governor,  issued  a  call  for  a  State  convention  at  Utica,84  each 
county  to  be  entitled  to  as  many  delegates  as  it  had  members 
in  the  legislature.86  This  experiment  with  the  convention 

81  Hammond,  History  of  Political  Parties  in  the  State  of  New  York,  I.  354. 

M  New  York  Evening  Post,  Sept.  27,  1814. 

88  The  real  reason  for  the  calling  of  this  mixed  convention  was  the  fact  that  the 
friends  of  De  Witt  Clinton,  who  was  the  real  choice  of  the  people,  feared  that  on 
account  of  the  opposition  of  Van  Buren  and  the  Albany  Regency,  their  favorite 
might  be  defeated  in  a  Legislative  Caucus,  especially  as  Clinton  was  especially 
strong  in  the  Federalist  counties.  See  Hammond,  I.  438-439. 

84  Hammond,  II.  173.  As  long  as  the  convention  was  held  at  the  capital  city, 
the  members  of  the  legislature  were  sure  to  control  its  action. 

86  Niles"s  Register,  XXVI.  117. 


SECT.  12.]  BY  LEGISLATIVE  RESOLUTION.  29 

system  appears  to  have  found  favor  with  the  people,  for  in 
1824  legislative  caucuses  of  both  the  Democratic  and  Clintonian 
parties  issued  calls  for  State  conventions  to  be  held  at 
Herkimer  and  Utica  respectively.  This  was  the  first  time, 
as  Hammond86  points  out,  that  the  regular  Democratic  members 
of  the  legislature  yielded  their  power  of  nominating  the  party 
candidate  for  governor,  but  that  yielding  was  final. 

While  the  State  officials  other  than  the  governor  and 
lieutenant-governor  continued  to  be  elected  by  the  legislature, 
nominations  for  these  offices  continued  to  be  made  by  a  legisla- 
tive caucus;87  but  since  the  adoption  of  the  amendment  to  the 
State  constitution  providing  for  the  election  of  those  officers 
by  the  people,  the  activity  of  such  a  caucus  in  New  York,  as 
in  other  States,  has  been  confined  to  nominating  candidates 
for  the  United  States  Senate,  and  for  the  various  offices  of 
the  two  branches  of  the  State  legislature. 

The  development  of  the  State  nominating  machinery  in  the 
other  States  was  similar  to  that  in  New  York.  In  some  States 
the  final  adoption  of  the  convention  system  as  the  sole  method 
of  nomination  occurred  earlier88  than  in  New  York,  in  other 
States  later;89  but  in  all  the  general  course  of  events  was  about 
the  same.  In  general  we  may  say  that  by  1835  the  convention 
system  was  the  prevailing  method  of  nomination  for  State  and 
district  officers.  Moreover,  the  procedure  of  the  State  and 
district  conventions  held  in  the  thirties  and  early  forties  was 
substantially  the  same  as  that  of  our  conventions  to-day.90 

12.  Presidential  Nominations  by  Legislative  Resolution.  Pre- 
vious to  the  election  of  1824,  as  has  been  shown  in  a  preceding 

86  Hammond,  II.  228. 

87  E.  g.,  see  Hammond,  II.  114. 

88  In  Pennsylvania  the  State  convention  was  again  firmly  established  by  1817. 
For  an  account  of  the  "  Independent  Republican"  convention  of  that  year,  see  the 
Aurora,  Jan.  I  and  Feb.  25,  1817. 

89  In  Massachusetts,  by  1828,  the  Democrats  seem  to  have  finally  adopted  the 
convention  system.     The  National  Republican  or  Whig  party,  however,  does  not 
appear  to  have  definitely  settled  down  to  the  convention  system  until   1840.     In 
Maine  a  legislative  caucus  was  held  as  late  as  1843  (Niles's  Register,  LXIV.  99). 

90  E.  g.,  see  yournal  of  the  Proceedings  of  the  National  Republican  Convention, 
held   at  Worcester,  Mass.,  Oct.  n,  1832,  published  by  order  of  the  Convention, 
Boston,  1832. 


30  THE  NOMINATING  SYSTEM.  [CHAP.  I. 

section,  candidates  for  the  Presidency  were  nominated  by  a 
Congressional  caucus.  With  the  commencement  of  the  revolt 
against  the  caucus  system  several  other  methods  of  nomination 
sprang  up  which,  during  the  campaign  of  1828,  obtained  posses- 
sion of  the  field.  The  first  of  these  methods  is  that  of  nomina- 
tion by  a  State  legislature  acting  in  its  official  capacity.  This 
was  not  an  entirely  new  method.  In  1807  President  Jefferson 
received  addresses  from  the  legislatures  of  several  States, 
approving  the  general  course  of  his  administration,  and  asking 
him  to  accept  for  the  third  time  the  Republican  nomination.91 
During  the  same  year  both  branches  of  the  Kentucky  Legisla- 
ture unanimously  recommended  James  Madison  as  a  candidate 
for  the  Presidency.92  In  all  the  cases  previous  to  1824,  how- 
ever, the  real  work  of  nomination  was  in  the  hands  of  the 
Congressional  caucus,  the  action  of  the  legislatures  being 
entirely  subsidiary.  It  was  not  until  the  campaign  of  1824 
that  nomination  "by  act  of  the  legislature"  came  to  have  any 
real  significance.  The  form  of  such  nominations  is  very  well 
shown  by  the  joint  resolution  adopted  by  the  Alabama  Legis- 
lature in  1824  recommending  Andrew  Jackson  for  the  Presi- 
dency. After  a  long  preamble  comes  the  following  resolution : 

Be  it  therefore  resolved  by  the  Senate  and  House  of  Representatives 
of  the  State  of  Alabama  in  general  assembly  convened  that  we  believe  it 
is  the  ardent  wish  of  a  large  majority  of  our  constituents  that  General 
Andrew  Jackson  should  succeed  Mr.  Monroe  as  President  of  the  United 
States  of  America,  and  we  have  no  doubt  he  will  receive  the  undivided 
support  of  the  State  of  Alabama ;  wherefore,  be  it  resolved,  that  the 
governor  of  this  State  be,  and  he  is  hereby,  requested  to  transmit  to  the 
governors  of  each  of  our  sister  States,  copies  of  the  foregoing  preamble 
and  resolution. 

In  this  case,  however,  the  joint  resolution  was  vetoed  by 
Governor  Pickens,  who,  in  his  veto  message,  after  warmly 
indorsing  the  sentiment  of  the  resolutions,  gave  the  following 
reasons  for  his  action: 

It  is  because  I  believe  it  is  not  fairly  within  the  legitimate  sphere  of 
legislation,  and,  so  far  as  my  knowledge  extends,  without  any  previous 

9J   Works  of  Thomas  Jefferson  (1859  ed.),  VIII.  121-5. 
w  United  States  Gazette,  March  21,  1808. 


SECT.  1 3-]        BY  STATE  LEGISLATIVE   CAUCUS.  3I 

example,  and  would  be  introductory  of  unnecessary,  if  not  mischievous, 
matters  into  our  legislative  deliberations,  that  I  am  induced  not  to  add 
my  signature  to  the  joint  resolutions.98 

After  the  above  veto  the  resolutions  were  laid  on  the  table, 
and  subsequently  a  resolution  was  introduced  and  adopted 
by  both  houses,  requesting  the  Speaker  of  the  House  of  Rep- 
resentatives and  the  President  of  the  Senate  to  transmit  a 
copy  of  the  resolutions  to  the  executive  of  each  State,  and 
to  each  of  the  Alabama  Senators  and  Representatives  at 
Washington.94 

This  method  of  nomination,  which  was  common  in  the  cam- 
paigns of  1824,  1828,  and  1832,  continued  to  exist  even  after 
the  adoption  of  the  national  convention  in  1832.  For  instance, 
in  January,  1835,  Hugh  L.  White  was  nominated  for  the 
Presidency  by  a  joint  resolution  of  the  Alabama  Legislature;95 
while  as  late  as  1842  John  C.  Calhoun  was  nominated  by  the 
legislatures  of  South  Carolina  and  Georgia  as  a  candidate  for 
the  election  of  1844.^  But  as  the  national  convention  system 
came  to  be  better  organized,  this  method  of  nomination  grad- 
ually disappeared. 

13.  Presidential  Nominations  by  State  Legislative  Caucus. 
Closely  akin  to  the  method  just  described  was  that  of  nomina- 
tion of  national  candidates  by  a  joint  caucus  of  the  party 
members  of  both  branches  of  a  State  legislature.  The  first 
case  of  actual  nomination  by  this  method  was  the  nomination 
of  De  Witt  Clinton  by  a  caucus  of  the  Republican  members  of 
the  New  York  Legislature  in  i8i2.97  With  the  commencement 
of  the  campaign  of  1824,"  it  began  to  be  generally  adopted, 
and  was  the  commonest  mode  of  nomination  during  the  period 
of  transition  from  the  Congressional  caucus  to  the  national 

93  Mies' s  Register,  XXV.  324. 

94  Ibid.,  362.     For  other   examples  of  this  method  of  nomination,  see   Niles's 
Register,  XXIX.  130  (Tenn.) ;  XXXI.  193  (Ga.) ;  XXXII.  103  (111.) ;  XXXIV.  25, 
(Mass.) 

s5  Ibid.,  XLVII.  378.  «  Ibid.,  LXIII.  282.  w  Ibid.,  II.  235. 

98  The  first  gun  in  that  memorable  campaign  appears  to  have  been  the  nomina- 
tion of  William  Lowndes  for  the  Presidency  by  a  caucus  of  the  Republican  mem- 
bers of  the  South  Carolina  Legislature.  See  Memoirs  of  John  Quincy  Adams,  V. 
468. 


32  THE  NOMINATING  SYSTEM.  [CHAP.  I. 

convention.     The   mode   of  procedure  may  perhaps  be   best 
illustrated  by  the  following  example. 

On  November  18,  1822,  in  accordance  with  a  previous 
notice,  a  meeting  of  the  Republican  members  of  the  Senate 
and  House  of  Representatives  of  the  Kentucky  Legislature  was 
held  in  the  hall  of  the  House  of  Representatives  after  the 
adjournment  of  the  two  branches.  The  call  for  the  meeting 
stated  the  object  to  be  "the  consideration  of  the  propriety  of 
recommending  to  the  people  of  the  United  States  some  suit- 
able person  to  fill  the  office  of  President  of  the  United  States 
after  the  expiration  of  the  present  presidential  term."  The 
meeting  was  organized  by  the  choice  of  William  T.  Barry  as 
chairman  and  Thomas  Speed  as  secretary.  Mr.  George  Robert- 
son then  offered  a  resolution  and  address,  which  were  unani- 
mously adopted.  The  resolution  read  as  follows: 

Resolved,  That  Henry  Clay,  late  Speaker  of  the  House  of  Represen- 
tatives, be  recommended  as  a  suitable  person  to  succeed  James  Monroe 
as  president. 

The  address  which  followed  the  resolution  stated  Kentucky's 
claim  to  the  Presidency  on  the  ground  of  locality,  and  then 
proceeded  to  eulogize  her  favorite  son  in  the  most  glowing 
terms." 

This  method  of  nomination  by  State  legislative  caucus,  like 
its  contemporary  official  method,  continued  to  exist  after 
i832,100  but  it  likewise  disappeared  with  the  firm  establishment 
of  the  convention  system. 

14.  Presidential  Nominations  by  Mixed  Conventions.  Another 
method  of  nominating  national  candidates  in  vogue  during  the 
transition  period  was  by  a  convention  composed  of  the  party 
members  of  the  legislature,  together  with  delegates  from  those 
counties  or  towns  not  represented  in  the  legislature  by  mem- 

89  Niles's  Register,  XXIII.  245.  In  some  of  the  States  it  was  customnry  for  the 
caucus  to  pass  a  nominating  resolution  in  blank,  and  after  the  close  of  the 
balloting  the  name  of  the  successful  candidate  was  inserted.  See  Niles's  Register, 
XXIII.  342. 

100  E.  g.,  Mr.  Van  Buren  was  nominated  for  the  Presidency  by  a  caucus  of  the 
Democratic  members  of  the  New  York  Legislature,  in  April,  1843.  See  Nilefs 
Register,  LXIV.  137. 


SECT.  1 5-]  BY  STATE   CONVENTIONS.  33 

bers  belonging  to  the  party  holding  the  convention.  A  good 
example  of  this  method  is  to  be  found  in  the  nomination  of 
John  Quincy  Adams  in  January,  1823,  at  a  "joint  meeting  of 
the  Republican  members  of  the  Massachusetts  legislature  and 
of  Republican  delegates  from  the  various  towns  of  the  common- 
wealth not  represented  in  the  legislature. " 101  The  mode  of 
procedure  of  such  a  body  was  exactly  the  same  as  that  of  the 
legislative  caucus  already  described. 

This  method,  like  those  previously  described,  is  occasionally 
met  with  after  the  general  adoption  of  the  convention  system. 
For  instance,  in  February,  1843,  a  convention  composed  of 
the  Whig  members  of  the  Virginia  Legislature,  and  of  two  hun- 
dred delegates  from  different  parts  of  the  State,  was  held  at 
Richmond,  at  which  resolutions  were  adopted  nominating 
Henry  Clay  as  the  Whig  candidate  for  the  Presidency,  and 
referring  the  nomination  of  a  candidate  for  the  Vice-Presidency 
to  the  national  convention.102 

15.  Presidential  Nominations  by  State  Conventions.  Still  an- 
other method  of  nominating  candidates  for  the  Presidency  is 
found  in  the  proceedings  of  a  "Jackson"  State  convention  held 
at  Harrisburg,  Pennsylvania,  in  January,  1828,  at  which 
the  following  preamble  and  resolutions  were  unanimously 
adopted : 

Whereas,  the  democratic  citizens  of  this  Commonwealth  in  accord- 
ance with  the  established  usages  of  the  party,  have  delegated  to  this 
convention  the  important  trust  of  nominating  candidates  for  the  presi- 
dency and  vice-presidency  of  the  United  States,  to  be  supported  at  the 
approaching  presidential  election  :  And  whereas  the  voice  of  the  demo- 
cratic party  has  been  unequivocally  expressed  in  favor  of  that  illustrious 
and  patriotic  citizen,  Andrew  Jackson  of  Tennessee,  as  president,  and 
John  C.  Calhoun  of  South  Carolina,  as  vice-president. 

W  See  Nibs's  Register,  XXIII.  342,  343. 

102  Ibid.,  LXIV.  22.  It  is  to  be  observed  that  after  the  establishment  of  the 
national  convention,  in  the  case  of  all  three  of  the  methods  described  above, 
except  in  the  case  of  the  "  bolting"  nominations  of  White  in  1836  and  Van  Buren 
in  1844,  the  action  of  the  legislature  or  caucus  was  subject  to  the  decision  of  the 
national  convention,  with  which  the  real  choice  lay.  For  this  reason,  strictly  they 
were  not  nominations  at  all,  but  rather  recommendations  of  certain  candidates 
to  the  favor  of  the  convention,  similar  to  the  resolutions  urging  the  nomination  of 
"  favorite  sons  "  by  the  State  conventions  of  the  present  day. 

3 


34  THE  NOMINATING  SYSTEM.  [CHAP.  1. 

Resolved,  That  Andrew  Jackson  of  Tennessee  be  nominated  as  the 
democratic  candidate  of  Pennsylvania  for  the  office  of  president  of  the 
United  States,— 

Resolved,  That  John  C.  Calhoun  of  South  Carolina  be  nominated  for 
the  office  of  vice-president  of  the  United  States.10* 

A  committee  was  appointed  to  draft  an  address  to  the 
"democratic  republican  citizens  of  Pennsylvania  on  the  subject 
of  the  approaching  election,"104  and  in  addition  a  "central 
committee  of  correspondence  "  was  appointed,  and  also  similar 
committees  for  every  county  in  the  State.106  A  full  electoral 
ticket  was  named  in  the  Jackson  interest.108  A  resolution  was 
then  passed  that  each  candidate  nominated  for  the  office  of 
Presidential  elector  give  "a  written  pledge  or  assurance"  that 
if  elected  he  would  vote  for  the  nominees  of  the  convention. 
In  case  any  candidate  refused  or  neglected  to  give  such  a 
pledge,  the  central  committee  was  empowered  to  substitute 
some  other  person  in  his  place.  The  central  committee  was 
also  empowered  to  fill  all  vacancies  that  might  occur.  After 
ordering  that  fifteen  thousand  copies  of  the  address  be  printed, 
—  one-third  of  them  in  the  German  language,  —  the  conven- 
tion adjourned. 

Even  after  the  adoption  of  the  convention  system  in  national 
politics,  the  State  conventions  continued  to  nominate  candi- 
dates for  the  Presidency,  the  effect  being  merely  an  expres- 
sion of  the  sentiment  of  the  party  in  the  State.  The  practice 
of  instructing  delegates  by  a  resolution  of  the  State  conven- 
tion to  vote  for  a  certain  person  or  persons  at  the  national 
convention  which  subsequently  arose,  and  which  still  exists, 
is  apparently  a  survival  of  the  former  system  of  actual 
nomination. 

16.  Presidential  Nominations  by  Public  Meetings.  One  of  the 
most  interesting  features  of  the  campaign  of  1824  was  the 
almost  universal  practice  of  obtaining  the  preferences  of 

N»  NiMs  Kegister,  XXXIII.  333,  334. 
104  This  corresponds  to  the  party  platform  of  to-day. 
I0*  Corresponding  to  our  State  and  County  committees  of  to-day. 
106  As  has  been  stated,  Presidential  electors  were  nominated  by  State  legislative 
caucuses,  or  by  State  conventions,  throughout  the  Congressional  caucus  period. 


SECT.  17.]    REASONS  FOR  A   CHAA'GE   OF  SYSTEM.  35 

the  people  as  to  Presidential  candidates  at  all  sorts  of  public 
gatherings.  All  over  the  country  mass  meetings  were  held, 
at  which  a  regular  ballot  was  taken,  just  as  at  a  regular 
election.  At  very  many  of  these  meetings  formal  resolu- 
tions were  adopted  nominating  some  candidate  for  the  Presi- 
dency. For  example,  in  March,  1824,  such  a  meeting  was 
held  at  Fredericksburg,  Virginia,  at  which  John  Quincy 
Adams  was  nominated  for  the  Presidency  and  Andrew  Jack- 
son for  the  Vice-Presidency,107  —  a  very  peculiar  combina- 
tion. These  meetings  were  in  reality  simply  meetings  held 
to  ratify  the  nomination  of  candidates  who  had  been  previously 
nominated  in  one  or  more  of  the  ways  already  described. 
In  other  words,  they  were  what  we  to-day  call  "rallies," 
the  only  difference  being  the  formal  adoption  of  nominating 
resolutions. 

17.  Reasons  for  a  Change  of  System.  All  of  the  five  methods 
of  nomination  for  national  offices  which  have  just  been 
described  could  obviously  be  nothing  more  than  temporary 
expedients.  In  the  first  place,  all  except  the  State  convention 
had  become  antiquated ;  and  secondly,  the  first  three  were 
unpopular,  because  they  were  forms  of  legislative  interference 
which,  in  the  case  of  State  nominations,  had  already  been 
abandoned  in  many  of  the  States,  and  which,  in  national  poli- 
tics, had  met  with  a  most  emphatic  rebuke  in  the  overthrow  of 
the  Congressional  caucus. 

Again,  with  the  reorganization  of  political  parties  after  the 
"era  of  good  feeling,"  and  the  rapid  growth  of  population, 
the  utter  inadequacy  of  any  system  of  State  nomination  for 
national  offices  became  readily  apparent.  A  national  party 
must  have  a  national  system  of  nomination,  and  the  expedient 
of  a  convention  naturally  suggested  itself.  Moreover,  this 
expedient  of  a  meeting  of  delegates  from  the  different  States 
had  already  been  tried  by  the  Federalists  in  1812,  when 
they  indorsed  De  Witt  Clinton,  the  nominee  of  the  Peace 
Republicans.  Owing,  however,  to  the  weakness  of  the 
Federalist  party,  and  the  more  or  less  secret  character  of  the 
meeting,  this  conference  of  a  few  of  the  Federalist  leaders 

»07  Niles's  Register,  XXVI.  39. 


36  THE  NOMINATING  SYSTEM.  [CHAP.  I. 

which  was  held  in  New  York  city  in  September,  1812,  attracted 
little  attention  at  the  time,  and  is  of  comparatively  little 
importance  to  us  in  tracing  the  actual  development  of  nomi- 
nating machinery.108  The  reason  why  the  national  convention 
was  not  generally  adopted  in  1812,  as  well  as  the  reason  why 
its  use  did  not  immediately  follow  the  abandonment  of  the 
Congressional  caucus  system  in  1824,  is  probably  to  be  found 
in  the  lack  of  efficient  communication  between  different  sec- 
tions of  the  country.  With  the  commencement  of  the  great 
railway  systems  in  the  early  thirties,  this  difficulty  began  to 
be  removed,  and  the  national  convention  took  the  place  of  the 
previous  varied  and  unsatisfactory  methods. 

1 8.  The  Rise  of  the  National  Convention.  Even  previous  to  the 
meeting  of  the  last  Congressional  caucus,  the  application  to 
national  politics  of  the  convention  system,  which  had  worked 
so  satisfactorily  in  State  nominations,  was  suggested  by  a 
Pennsylvania  member  of  Congress.  "I  sincerely  hope, "  said 
he,  "that  Pennsylvania  will  take  the  lead  in  recommending  a 
national  convention.  It  is  the  only  plan  calculated  to  con- 
ciliate and  harmonize  the  Republican  party  throughout  the 
Union."109 

The  first  call  for  a  national  nominating  convention  was 
issued  in  September,  1830,  by  a  preliminary  conference  of  the 
Anti-Masonic  party,  and  the  assemblage  of  delegates  which 
met  at  Baltimore  in  pursuance  of  it  on  September  26,  1831, 
if  we  overlook  the  Federalist  Conference  of  1812  mentioned 
in  the  preceding  section,  was  the  first  national  nominating 
convention.  There  were  present  one  hundred  and  twelve 
delegates  representing  thirteen  States.110  The  main  feature 
of  this  convention,  which  sat  for  three  days,  was  the  adoption 
of  a  lengthy  "Address  to  the  People  of  the  United  States,"  - 
what  is  now  called  a  platform,  —  containing  about  ten  thou- 

108  For  an  account  of  the  Federalist  conference  of  1812,  the  reader  is  referred 
to  Mr.  John  S.  Murdock's  admirable  little  article  entitled  "  The  First  National 
Nominating  Convention."     American  Historical  Review,  I.  680. 

109  Nibs's  Register,  XXV.  306;  also  Memoirs  i>f  John  Quincy  Adams,  VI.  248. 

110  By  the  provisions  of  the  call  each  State  was  entitled  to  as  many  delegates  as 
it  had  electoral  votes,  which  is  the  present  method  of  apportionment,  except  that 
the  number  has  been  doubled.     See  §  21. 


SECT.  1 8.]    RISE   OF  THE  NATIONAL   CONVENTION.  37 

sand  words,  and  occupying  over  an  hour  and  a  half  in  the 
reading.111 

In  February,  1831,  a  caucus  of  the  National  Republican  or 
Whig  members  of  the  Maryland  Legislature  issued  a  call  for 
a  national  convention  to  be  held  at  Baltimore  in  December 
of  that  year,  to  which  the  opponents  of  the  Jackson  adminis- 
tration in  the  several  States  were  invited  to  send  delegates 
"  equal  in  number  to  the  electors  of  president  to  which  their 
States  are  respectively  entitled,"  and  the  election  of  delegates 
by  Congressional  districts  was  suggested.112  The  convention 
which  met  in  accordance  with  this  call  was  attended  by  one 
hundred  and  sixty-seven  delegates  from  seventeen  different 
States.  An  examination  of  the  proceedings 113  shows  that 
there  has  been  very  little  change  in  procedure  from  that  day 
to  this,  the  reason  being  that,  in  1832,  the  convention  system 
was  already  highly  developed  in  many  of  the  States,  and  con- 
sequently there  was  little  room  for  change.  We  find  that 
there  was  a  temporary  organization;  an  examination  of  the 
credentials  of  the  delegates;  the  appointment  of  a  committee 
on  permanent  organization,  which  subsequently  brought  in  a 
list  of  permanent  officers;  nominating  speeches;  the  appoint- 
ment of  a  committee  to  prepare  an  address  to  the  people, 
corresponding  to  our  committee  on  resolutions;  and  finally  a 
committee  to  notify  the  successful  candidates  of  their  nomina- 
tion. One  paragraph  of  the  published  proceedings  is  especi- 
ally interesting.  On  motion  of  Mr.  Fairfax  of  Virginia,  it 
was  resolved  "that  a  central  State  Corresponding  Committee 
be  provisionally  appointed  in  each  state  where  none  is  now 
appointed,  and  that  it  be  recommended  to  the  several  states 
to  organize  subordinate  corresponding  committees  in  each 
county  and  town  in  their  several  respective  states." 

111  Niles's  Register,  XLI.  83-5;  and  166-74. 

112  Ibid.,  XL.  28-9.    This  is  interesting,  as  it  is  the  method  which  has  now  come 
to  be  almost  universally  adopted.     At  that  time,  however,  the  suggestion  was  not 
generally  followed,  the  different  States  choosing  their  delegates  in  various  ways : 
e.  g.  in  Maine  and  Pennsylvania,  by  district  conventions ;  in  New  Hampshire  by 
legislative  caucus  ;  in  Massachusetts,  Connecticut,  New  York,  and  Maryland  by  the 
State  convention. 

«3  Ibid.,  XLI.  301-7. 


38  THE  NOMINATING  SYSTEM.  [CHAP.  I. 

The  address  to  the  people,114  corresponding  to  a  platform, 
consisted  of  a  long  and  severe  arraignment  of  the  Jackson 
administration,  followed  by  a  profuse  eulogy  of  the  nominees, 
Messrs.  Clay  and  Sergeant.  It  closed  with  these  words : 

Such,  fellow  citizens,  is  the  character  of  the  present  administration 
—  such  are  the  motives  for  changing  it,  and  such  are  the  persons  whom 
we  recommend  to  you  for  the  chief  executive  officers.  Compare  their 
qualifications  with  those  of  their  competitors ;  and  may  the  goodness  of 
Providence  so  enlighten  your  choice,  that  it  may  tend  to  promote  the 
security  and  permanence  of  our  excellent  political  institutions,  and  the 
true  greatness  and  glory  of  our  beloved  country. 

At  the  suggestion  of  this  convention,  a  National  Republican 
Convention  of  young  men  was  held  at  Washington,  D.C.,  May 
7,  1832,  at  which  the  nominees  of  the  regular  convention 
of  the  party  were  indorsed.116  This  assembly,  which  had  sub- 
stantially the  same  procedure  as  the  convention  already 
described,  is  chiefly  noteworthy  for  its  adoption  of  a  series  of 
resolutions  in  place  of  an  "Address  to  the  People,"  thus 
making  the  party  platform  more  nearly  like  the  platforms  of 
the  present  day. 

The  third  convention  to  be  held  was  that  of  the  Democratic 
party,  its  principal  object  being  to  unite  on  a  candidate  for 
the  Vice-Presidency.  This  convention  met  at  Baltimore,  May 
21,  1832.  Its  proceedings  were  very  similar  to  those  of  the 
Whig  convention.  Mr.  Sumner  of  New  Hampshire,  in  call- 
ing the  delegates  to  order,  gave  the  following  account  of  the 
origin  and  objects  of  the  meeting: 

GENTLEMEN.  —  The  proposition  for  calling  a  general  convention  of 
delegates,  to  act  on  the  nomination  of  a  candidate  for  president,  and 
to  select  a  suitable  candidate  for  vice-president  of  the  United  States, 
originated  in  the  state  of  New  Hampshire,  by  the  friends  of  democracy 
in  that  state ;  and  it  appears  that  the  proposition,  although  opposed  by 
the  enemies  of  the  democratic  party,  has  found  favor  in  nearly  and  per- 
haps all  the  States  in  the  Union.  .  .  .  The  object  of  the  representatives 

««  Niles's  Register,  XLI.  307-12. 

116  For  a  full  account  of  the  proceedings  of  this  convention,  the  reader  is  referred 
to  Niles's  Register,  XLI  I.  236-8. 


SECT.  1 9.]    NATIONAL   CONVENTION  ESTABLISHED.  39 

of  the  people  of  New  Hampshire  who  called  this  convention  was  not  to 
impose  on  the  people  as  candidate  for  either  of  the  two  offices  in  this 
government,  any  local  favorite ;  but  to  concentrate  the  opinion  of  all  the 
states.  .  .  .  They  believed  that  the  example  of  this  convention  would 
operate  favorably  in  future  elections ;  that  the  people  would  be  disposed 
after  seeing  the  good  effects  of  this  convention  in  conciliating  the 
different  and  distant  sections  of  the  country,  to  continue  this  mode  of 
nomination. 116 

19.  The  National  Convention  Fully  Established.  The  belief  of 
the  New  Hampshire  Democrats,  in  1832,  in  regard  to  the 
permanence  of  the  national  convention,  proved  to  be  well- 
founded,  and  from  that  day  to  this  the  regular  candidates  of 
the  Democratic  party  have  been  nominated  at  national  conven- 
tions conducted  on  substantially  the  same  lines.  In  1836, 
however,  there  was  considerable  opposition  to  the  holding  of 
a  convention,  especially  among  some  of  the  Southern  Demo- 
crats. The  reason  for  this  opposition  was  the  fact  that  Presi- 
dent Jackson  was  determined  that  Van  Buren  should  be  his 
successor,  and  recommended  a  convention  with  that  end  in 
view;117  whereupon  the  legislatures  of  Alabama  and  Tennessee 
nominated  Judge  White  of  the  latter  State  as  Democratic  can- 
didate for  President.  In  spite  of  all  opposition,  however,  a 
national  convention  was  held  at  Baltimore,  in  May,  1835,  at 
which  Van  Buren  and  Johnson  were  nominated  as  the  party 
standard  bearers.  The  irregular  character  of  the  convention  is 
shown  by  the  fact  that  of  the  six  hundred  delegates  in  attend- 
ance, one  hundred  and  eighty-eight  were  from  Maryland,  and 
one  hundred  from  Virginia.  Each  State  delegation,  however, 
no  matter  how  large  its  numbers,  was  only  allowed  to  cast  the 
number  of  votes  that  the  State  was  entitled  to  in  its  electoral 
college.118 

116  For  an  account  of  proceedings,  see  Niles's  Register,  XLII.  234-6. 

117  Ibid.,  XLV.  19. 

118  Ibid.,  XLVIII.  226-9.     The  irregular  character  of  this  convention  is  strik- 
ingly illustrated  in  the  case  of  the  vote  of  Tennessee.     No  delegates  were  elected 
to  the  convention  from  that  State,  but  nevertheless  the  entire  vote  to  which  the 
State  was  entitled  was  cast  for  Mr.  Van  Buren  by  a  Mr.  Edward   Rucker.     In 
reply  to  a  well-merited  denunciation  of  the  proceeding  which  appeared  in  A'iles's 
Register,  Mr.  Rucker  admitted  that  he  was  not  delegated  to  act  in  the  convention, 
and  then  went  on  to  say :  "  I  happened  to  be  in  Baltimore  at  the  time,  and  after 


40  THE  NOMINATING  SYSTEM.  [CHAP.  I. 

The  Whig  party  held  no  regular  convention  in  1836,  their 
object  being  to  take  advantage  of  all  the  local  elements  of 
opposition  to  the  party  in  power,  and,  if  possible,  throw  the 
election  into  the  House  of  Representatives.  General  Harrison 
was  nominated  by  an  irregular  convention  held  at  Harrisburg; 
Judge  McLean  by  a  legislative  caucus  in  Ohio ;  and  Daniel 
Webster  by  the  legislature  of  Massachusetts. 

In  1840,  both  parties  held  regularly  called  national  conven- 
tions, and  from  that  time  to  this  the  convention  system  has 
been  the  regular  method  of  nomination  for  the  Presidency  and 
Vice- Presidency. 

20.  The  Question  of  Procedure.  In  regard  to  the  procedure  of 
national  conventions  there  has  been  remarkably  little  change 
in  the  last  sixty  years.  There  are  one  or  two  rules,  however, 
the  history  of  which  is  worthy  of  notice.  The  statement  was 
made  in  a  preceding  section  m  that  the  proceedings  of  the  first 
Democratic  convention  were  very  similar  to  those  of  the  first 
Whig  convention ;  two  exceptions  ought  perhaps  to  be  made  to 
that  assertion.  The  first  is  the  adoption  by  the  Democratic 
convention  of  the  following  resolution: 

Resolved :  That  each  state  be  entitled,  in  the  nomination  to  be  made 
of  a  candidate  for  the  vice-presidency,  to  a  number  of  votes  equal  to  the 
number  to  which  it  will  be  entitled  in  the  electoral  colleges  under  the 
new  apportionment,  in  voting  for  president  and  vice-president ;  and  that 
two  thirds  of  the  whole  number  of  the  votes  in  the  convention  shall  be 
necessary  to  constitute  a  choice. 

This  is  the  origin  of  the  famous  "two-thirds  rule,"  which 
has  been  adopted  by  every  subsequent  convention  of  the  Demo- 
cratic party.120  Moreover,  its  operation  has  been  confined  to 

the  delegates  from  the  different  States  had  their  credentials  examined  by  the  com- 
mittee appointed  for  that  purpose,  there  appeared  to  be  no  one  present  represent- 
ing Tennessee.  This  circumstance  seemed  to  be  deeply  regretted  by  many,  and  its 
being  mentioned  that  I  was  there  and  a  Tennesseean,  it  was  suggested  by  some 
that  I  might  vote,  which  I  accordingly  did."  (Niles's  Register,  XLVIII.  273.) 

»•  See  §  1 8. 

180  In  the  Democratic  convention  of  1835,  a  strong  effort  was  made  to  substitute 
a  majority  for  a  two-thirds  vote ;  but  the  two-thirds  rule  was  finally  adopted  by  a 
vote  of  231  to  210,  and  has  ever  since  remained  in  force  in  Democratic  national 
conventions.  (See  Mies' s  Register,  XLVIII.  228.) 


SECT.  20.]  THE   QUESTION  OF  PROCEDURE.  ^ 

that  party,  a  simple  majority  being  sufficient  to  nominate  in 
both  Whig  and  Republican  conventions. 

The  other  exception  to  which  reference  has  been  made  is  to 
be  found  in  a  resolution  that  "the  majority  of  the  delegates 
from  each  state  designate  the  person  by  whom  the  votes  of 
that  state  shall  be  given."  This  was  the  origin  of  the  "unit 
rule."  Although  in  this  convention  several  of  the  State  dele- 
gations were  divided,  nevertheless  the  tendency  of  the  rule,  as 
is  shown  by  the  result  of  the  balloting,  was  to  bring  it  about 
that  the  majority  of  each  delegation  should  decide  for  whom 
the  entire  vote  of  the  State  should  be  cast.  In  the  Demo- 
cratic convention  of  1836,  the  unit  rule  appears  to  have  been 
looked  upon  as  an  established  custom,  the  Massachusetts 
delegation  being  the  only  one  whose  vote  is  recorded  as 
divided.121 

In  1839  the  unit  rule  was  adopted  by  the  Whig  party.  At 
the  national  convention  of  that  year  a  resolution  was  adopted 
that  each  State  delegation  should  vote  by  itself  for  candidates 
for  the  Presidency  and  Vice-Presidency,  and  that  "the  vote  of 
a  majority  of  each  delegation  shall  be  reported  as  the  vote  of 
that  state  "  in  a  sort  of  committee  of  the  whole.  The  decision 
of  the  committee  of  the  whole  was  then  to  be  reported  to  the 
convention.122 

Either  in  the  form  of  a  rule  adopted  by  the  convention,  or 
in  the  form  of  instructions  by  the  State  conventions,  this 
practice  of  having  a  majority  of  each  State  delegation  cast  the 
entire  vote  of  the  State,  soon  became  firmly  fixed  in  the  pro- 
cedure of  both  of  the  leading  political  parties.  The  first 
successful  revolt  against  this  disregard  of  the  rights  of  the 
minority  occurred  in  the  national  convention  of  the  Republi- 
can party  in  1876.  Four  of  the  delegates  from  Pennsylvania 
demanded  that  their  votes  be  recorded  separately,  in  spite  of 
the  fact  that  the  delegation  had  been  instructed  by  the  State 
convention  to  vote  as  a  unit.  The  President  of  the  convention 
gave  a  ruling  in  favor  of  the  four  Pennsylvania  members,  and 
on  an  appeal,  the  decision  of  the  chair  was  sustained  by  a  vote 

121  See  Baltimore  Chronicle,  May  21,  1835. 

122  See  Niles's  Register,  LVII.  249. 


42  THE  NOM1NA  TING  SYSTEM.  [CHAP.  I. 

of  three  hundred  and  ninety-five  to  three  hundred  and  fifty- 
three.123  In  1880  the  unit  rule,  so  far  as  the  Republican  party 
is  concerned,  was  definitely  abandoned.  The  Republican  con- 
vention of  that  year  adopted  a  new  rule,  by  which,  if  any 
objection  is  made  to  the  vote  of  any  State  as  announced  by 
the  chairman  of  the  delegation,  "  the  president  of  the  conven- 
tion shall  direct  the  roll  of  members  of  such  delegation  to  be 
called  and  the  result  recorded  in  accordance  with  the  votes 
individually  given."124 

In  Democratic  national  conventions  the  unit  rule  is  still 
enforced  in  regard  to  any  State  delegation  which  has  been  so 
instructed  by  its  State  convention,  or  which  adopts  the  rule 
itself.126  The  question  of  the  right  of  individual  delegates  to 
have  their  votes  recorded  separately  was  definitely  decided  in 
the  negative  at  the  national  convention  of  1892.  The  conven- 
tion was  voting  by  States  on  the  adoption  of  the  platform. 
When  Pennsylvania  was  called  by  the  secretary,  the  chairman 
of  the  delegation  from  that  State  declared  the  vote  to  be  sixty- 
four  nays.  As  soon  as  the  vote  was  announced,  Mr.  Wallace 
of  the  Pennsylvania  delegation  protested  in  behalf  of  fifteen 
members  of  the  delegation  against  the  power  of  a  majority  of 
the  delegation  to  bind  him  and  his  colleagues.  In  answer  the 
chairman  of  the  delegation  stated  that  the  delegation  had  been 
instructed  by  the  State  convention  "to  vote  as  a  unit  upon 
all  questions  which  might  come  before  it,  and  that  its  vote 
should  be  cast  in  accordance  with  the  direction  of  a  majority 
of  the  delegation."  The  President  of  the  convention  then 
ruled  that  "  the  announcement  of  the  vote  given  by  the  chair- 
man of  the  state  delegation  must  be  accepted  as  the  vote  of 
that  delegation,"  stating,  in  support  of  the  ruling,  that  it  had 
been  the  custom  in  preceding  Democratic  conventions  for  the 

V*  Official  Proceedings  of  the  Republican  National  Convention  of  1876,  88- 
too. 

184  Official  Proceeding!  of  the  Republican  National  Convention  of  1880  (Chicago, 
1881),  43,  Rule  8. 

136  The  rules  which  have  been  adopted  by  every  Democratic  convention  since 
1852  provide  that  the  manner  in  which  the  vote  of  each  State  shall  be  cast  is  "  to 
be  decided  by  the  delegation  of  each  State  by  itself."  (Official  Proceedings  of  Demo* 
erotic  National  Convention  of  1892,  67.) 


SECT.  21.]    CALL  OF  NATIONAL  CONVENTIONS,  ETC.          43 

convention  to  enforce  the  unit  rule  wherever  it  had  been 
adopted  by  the  States  themselves.126 

21.  The  Call  of  National  Conventions  and  the  Choice  of  Delegates. 

With  the  growth  of  party  organization  both  the  manner  of 
issuing  the  call  and  the  election  of  delegates  have  assumed  a 
regularity  and  system  which  were  lacking  in  the  earlier  con- 
ventions. Previous  to  1852,  the  call  for  a  national  convention 
was  usually  issued  either  by  a  Congressional  caucus  or  by  a 
caucus  of  the  party  members  of  some  State  legislature.  For 
the  past  forty  years,  however,  in  the  case  of  an  established 
political  party,  this  call  has  been  issued  by  a  permanent 
body  known  as  the  National  Committee,  the  members  of  which 
are  chosen  at  each  convention  to  serve  during  the  four  years 
ensuing. 

In  regard  to  the  admission  of  delegates,  the  irregular  pro- 
ceedings of  the  earlier  conventions  has  already  been  referred 
to  in  a  preceding  section.127  A  similar  irregularity  prevailed 
in  regard  to  the  choice  of  delegates.  In  1832  and  1836,  dele- 
gates to  the  various  conventions  were  chosen  in  a  variety  of 
ways.  In  some  States  they  were  all  chosen  by  the  State  con- 
vention or  by  a  legislative  caucus,  while  in  others  they  were 
chosen  by  district  conventions  or  by  mass  meetings  of  the 
voters.  In  May,  1838,  the  Ohio  Whig  convention,  after  a 
warm  discussion,  decided,  by  a  large  majority,  that  each  Con- 
gressional district  should  have  the  right  to  choose  its  delegate 
to  the  national  convention,  the  two  delegates  at  large  being 
chosen  as  before,  by  the  State  convention,  "as  being  most 
democratic,  and  best  calculated  to  bring  out  the  real  senti- 
ments of  the  people."  128  This  method  of  choosing  delegates, 
which  is  by  far  the  fairest,  has  from  that  time  to  this  steadily 
gained  in  favor,  until  it  is  now  the  prevailing  method  through- 
out the  country.  In  the  Republican  party,  by  a  rule  adopted 
at  the  national  convention  of  1892,  every  State  is  now  obliged 
to  choose  its  delegates  in  this  manner.  In  the  Democratic 
party,  in  some  of  the  States  and  notably  in  New  York,  all 

186  Official  Proceedings  of  the  Democratic  National  Convention  of  1892,  90,  91. 

127  §  19,  note  117. 

128  See  Niles's  Register,  LVI.  259. 


44  THE  NOMINATING  SYSTEM.  [CHAP.  I. 

the  delegates  are  still  chosen  by  the  State  convention;  but 
it  seems  probable  that  a  uniform  system  will  be  eventually 
adopted. 

In  the  early  conventions  each  State  was  entitled  to  as  many 
votes  as  it  had  electoral  votes,  while  the  number  of  delegates 
which  a  State  might  send  was  not  fixed.  After  1852,  how- 
ever, the  number  of  delegates  to  the  Democratic  national  con- 
vention la9  was  definitely  fixed  at  double  the  number  of  votes 
to  which  the  State  was  entitled  in  its  electoral  college,  which 
gave  each  delegate  half  a  vote  in  the  convention.  This  system 
continued  until  1872,  when  the  present  rule  was  adopted  of 
allowing  to  each  State  twice  as  many  delegates  and  twice  as 
many  votes  as  it  has  votes  in  its  electoral  college.  The  latter 
method  has  been  in  vogue  in  Republican  conventions  ever 
since  1860. 

22.  The  Growth  of  Party  Organization.  The  early  caucuses 
and  primaries  generally  appointed  a  campaign  committee, 
whose  duty  it  was  to  use  every  effort  to  secure  the  election  of 
the  caucus  nominees.130  These  local  committees  corresponded 
to  the  ward  and  town  committees  of  the  present  day.  With 
the  increase  of  urban  population  such  committees  came  to  be 
more  highly  organized,  until,  by  1820,  they  were  working  on 
practically  the  same  lines  as  similar  organizations  at  the  pres- 
ent time.  For  instance,  we  find  that  in  Boston,  in  March, 
1816,  an  enthusiastic  meeting  of  the  Federalist  City  Com- 
mittee was  held  at  the  Exchange  Coffee  House,  and  "spirited 
returns  were  made  by  the  chairmen  of  all  the  ward  committees, 
which  were  received  with  loud  plaudits."  131 

About  the  same  time,  county  and  district  committees  began 
to  be  permanently  established  on  present  lines,  and  by  1830 
a  complete  system  of  State  and  district  committees  was  in 
existence  in  many  of  the  States.  The  general  awakening  at 
this  time  among  political  leaders  to  the  necessity  of  thorough 
party  organization  is  well  illustrated  by  the  resolution  adopted 
by  the  Whig  national  convention  of  1832,  referred  to  in  §  18. 

129  The  Whig  party  practically  disappeared  from  politics  in  1852. 

119  See  §  4  of  the  present  chapter. 

10  Columbian  Centinel,  March  27,  1816. 


SECT.  23.]     THE  PRESENT  SYSTEM  SUMMARIZED.  45 

Although  the  early  national  conventions,  like  the  first  State 
conventions,  usually  elected  a  "  Committee  of  Correspon- 
dence,"  it  was  not  until  the  Democratic  convention  of  1848 
that  a  permanent  national  committee  consisting  of  one  mem- 
ber from  each  State  was  chosen,  with  power  to  call  the  next 
national  convention.  The  present  Republican  party,  born 
after  the  establishment  of  this  precedent,  has  had  a  national 
committee  from  the  beginning  of  its  history.  The  first  call 
for  a  convention  was  issued  in  1856  by  the  chairmen  of  the 
Republican  State  Committees  of  Vermont,  Massachusetts, 
Pennsylvania,  Ohio,  and  Wisconsin.132  This  convention, 
which  met  at  Pittsburg,  in  February,  made  no  nominations, 
but  appointed  a  national  committee  composed  of  one  member 
from  each  State,  which  body  issued  the  call  for  the  regular 
nominating  convention.133 

The  existence  of  national,  State,  county,  district,  and  local 
committees  of  the  different  political  parties  is  conducive  to  the 
maintenance  of  party  efficiency, — a  fact  recognized  as  early 
as  1832.  The  fact  that  party  organization  has  become  more 
elaborate  and  complex  is  not  to  be  wondered  at;  it  is  the 
natural  result  of  the  growth  of  the  country  and  consequent 
necessary  extension  of  political  machinery. 

23.  The  Present  System  Summarized.  In  the  present  chapter 
we  have  endeavored  to  trace  some  of  the  main  features  in  the 
development  of  our  nominating  machinery.  Before  passing 
to  a  detailed  description  of  the  system  which  has  thus  been 
developed  by  the  practice  of  a  century  and  a  half,  it  may  be 
well  to  summarize  briefly  its  main  characteristics. 

Nominations  in  the  United  States  at  the  present  time  are, 
in  most  cases,  made  by  conventions  of  the  various  political 
parties,  composed  of  delegates  chosen  at  caucuses  or  primaries 
of  the  party  voters  held  in  small  districts.  In  the  case  of  some 
of  the  minor  offices,  however,  nominations  are  frequently  made 
directly  by  the  party  voters  in  these  primary  meetings. 

To  this   general   rule,    by  which   candidates   for   the   more 

132  See  Proceedings  of  the  First  Three  Republican  National  Conventions  (Minne- 
apolis, 1893),  7- 

133  Ibid.,  14. 


46  THE  NOMINATING  SYSTEM.  [CHAP.  I. 

important  offices,  at  least,  are  nominated  by  delegate  conven- 
tions, there  are  several  exceptions.  In  the  first  place,  there 
is  the  old  English  system,  under  which  a  person  announces 
himself  as  a  candidate  for  office.184  This  is  found  in  some 
parts  of  the  South,  and  is  occasionally  met  with  at  the  North, 
particularly  in  the  case  of  independent  candidates.  This  cus- 
tom, however,  is  to  be  distinguished  from  the  familiar  practice 
prevailing  throughout  the  country  of  persons  announcing  them- 
selves as  candidates  for  the  party  nomination,  the  final  selec- 
tion being  in  the  hands  of  the  party  voters  at  the  primaries 
or  at  a  convention. 

Another  unusual  system  is  that  of  primary  election,  under 
which  the  individual  voter,  instead  of  voting  for  delegates  to  a 
nominating  convention,  votes  directly  for  the  persons  whom  he 
desires  to  see  made  the  candidates  of  his  party  for  the  various 
elective  offices. 

Finally,  we  have  the  system  of  nomination  by  "petition," 
or  by  "nomination  paper,"  which  has  recently  come  in  with 
the  introduction  of  the  Australian  ballot  system.  Under 
this  candidates  may  be  put  in  nomination  by  filing  with  the 
proper  officer  a  paper  signed  by  a  certain  specified  number  of 
qualified  voters. 

Returning  to  the  general  system,  it  will  be  noticed  in  the 
following  chapters  that,  starting  with  the  caucus  or  primary 
called  for  the  purpose  of  nominating  candidates  for  some  of 
the  minor  offices,  there  is  a  gradual  increase  in  the  complexity 

184  It  is  interesting  to  note  how  rapidly,  in  England  herself,  this  old  practice  is 
giving  way  in  presence  of  a  widely  extended  suffrage.  The  following  passage  from 
Bryce's  American  Commonwealth  puts  the  change  in  a  clear  light :  "  The  rapid 
change  in  the  practice  of  England  in  this  point  is  a  curious  symptom  of  the  progress 
of  democratic  ideas  there.  As  late  as  the  general  elections  of  1868  and  1874,  nearly 
all  candidates  offered  themselves  to  the  electors,  though  some  professed  to  do  so 
in  pursuance  of  requisitions  emanating  from  the  electors.  In  1880  many  — I  think 
most  —  Liberal  candidates  in  boroughs,  and  some  in  counties,  were  chosen  by  local 
party  associations,  and  appealed  to  the  Liberal  elector-  on  the  ground  of  having 
been  so  chosen.  In  1885  nearly  all  new  candidates  were  so  chosen,  and  a  man 
offering  himself  against  the  nominee  of  the  association  was  denounced  as  an  inter- 
loper and  traitor  to  the  party.  The  same  process  has  been  going  on  in  the  Tory 
party,  though  more  slowly."  (Vol.  II.  p.  76,  ed.  1891.)  See  also  "The  Caucus," 
by  Mr.  Joseph  Chamberlain,  Fortnightly  Review,  xjut.  72. 


SECT.  23.]     THE  PRESENT  SYSTEM  SUMMARIZED.  47 

of  the  organization  and  procedure,  until  we  come  to  the 
national  convention  called  for  the  purpose  of  nominating  can- 
didates for  the  Presidency  and  Vice-Presidency,  the  only  two 
offices  which  all  the  voters  of  the  country  have  a  part  in  fill- 
ing. Such  an  increased  complexity,  however,  is  the  natural 
and  inevitable  result  of  the  increased  size  and  importance  of 
the  undertaking.  It  is  to  be  noted,  also,  that  the  caucus  or 
primary  in  New  England  at  least  is,  in  most  cases,  still  gov- 
erned by  the  same  simple  procedure  as  in  the  days  of  Samuel 
Adams.  It  is  to-day,  as  then,  simply  a  town  meeting  of  the 
party  voters.  On  the  other  hand,  the  nominating  convention 
of  more  recent  origin  has  gradually  become  more  highly  organ- 
ized and  developed  than  when  it  was  first  introduced.  Such 
a  development  is  the  natural  result  of  the  enormous  increase 
in  our  population,  rendering  necessary  an  elaborate  party 
machinery  for  bringing  party  principles  to  bear  upon  the  con- 
duct of  State  and  national  governments. 

But,  although  at  first  sight  apparently  so  complex,  our  pres- 
ent system  of  nomination  is,  in  reality,  comparatively  simple. 
In  theory  it  would  be  desirable  that  the  party  voters  should 
come  together  in  mass  meeting  and  nominate  their  candidates 
for  governor  and  other  State  offices.  In  practice  this  is  im- 
possible, and,  accordingly,  the  party  voters  meet  in  caucuses 
or  primary  elections  in  the  various  cities  and  towns,  and  dele- 
gate persons  to  represent  them  in  a  State  convention  held  for 
the  purpose  of  nominating  a  State  ticket,  just  as  on  election 
day  they  choose  persons  to  represent  them  in  the  State  legisla- 
ture held  for  the  purpose  of  making  laws. 

So  in  regard  to  the  nomination  of  a  candidate  for  the  Presi- 
dency of  the  United  States.  Not  only  is  it  impossible  for  all 
the  Republicans  or  all  the  Democrats  of  the  country  to  assem- 
ble, even  the  party  voters  in  each  congressional  district  are  too 
numerous  to  meet  and  elect  delegates  to  represent  them  in  a 
national  convention.  Since  the  voters  cannot  do  this,  they 
gather  in  their  various  cities  and  towns,  and  choose  delegates 
to  a  congressional  convention,  which,  in  turn,  chooses  two 
delegates  to  the  national  convention.  Thus  for  the  great 
national  contests  we  have  a  preliminary  election  in  three 


48  THE  NOMINA  TING  SYSTEM.  [CHAP.  I. 

degrees,  as  well  as  a  final  election  in  two  degrees,  — viz.  :  (i) 
the  choice  of  delegates  by  the  party  voters ;  (2)  the  choice  by 
these  delegates  of  other  delegates ;  and  (3)  the  choice  by  these 
latter  of  candidates  for  President  and  Vice-President.  All 
three  of  these  steps,  however,  are  rendered  absolutely  neces- 
sary by  the  size  of  the  country  and  its  large  and  rapidly 
increasing  population.  That  the  results  would  be  better  if 
nominations  were  made  directly  by  the  people  is  doubtful ; 
in  the  case  of  the  higher  offices,  it  is  certainly  impracticable. 
In  short,  the  present  system  is  the  result  of  a  gradual  develop- 
ment and  of  long  experience.  Whatever  the  evils  that  may  be 
found  to  have  arisen  under  it,  it  is  in  itself  a  rational  system, 
and  a  preventive  of  the  worse  evils  of  confusion,  hap-hazard 
choice,  and  lack  of  party  leadership  and  direction. 


ii. 


DESCRIPTION   OF   THE   PRESENT   SYSTEM   OF 
NOMINATIONS. 


CHAPTER   II. 

NOMINATIONS   FOR  LOCAL  OFFICES. 

I.  Nominations  in  Towns.  In  those  parts  of  the  country 
where  town  government  prevails,  especially  in  New  England, 
the  smaller  communities,  as  a  rule,  have  no  regularly-called 
caucuses  or  primaries  for  the  nomination  of  candidates  for  the 
various  town  offices,  previous  to  the  annual  town  meeting.  In 
many  cases  candidates  are  put  in  nomination  at  the  town  meet- 
ing without  any  previous  arrangement,  especially  in  the  case 
of  old  and  faithful  officers  who  are  re-elected  year  after  year, 
by  common  consent.  On  the  other  hand,  where  there  is  a 
contest  for  any  particular  office  or  offices,  candidates  either 
announce  themselves,  or,  more  commonly,  are  nominated  at 
private  gatherings  known  as  "parlor  caucuses,"  and  the  cam- 
paign is  then  vigorously  carried  on  at  the  post-office  and  the 
country  store.  In  the  towns  and  villages  outside  of  New  Eng- 
land, however,  regular  town  or  village  primaries  are  usually 
called  by  the  different  political  parties,  at  which  complete 
tickets  for  town  offices  are  nominated,  which  are  later  printed 
and  distributed  at  the  polls. 

But  while  in  many  places,  even  in  New  England,  national 
party  lines  are  drawn  in  local  affairs,  party  action  is  less  vigor- 
ous in  town  than  in  State  and  county  elections.  For  instance, 
in  some  of  the  Republican  towns  of  the  strongly  Republican 
State  of  Maine,  Democrats  are  frequently  found  on  the  board 
of  selectmen ;  while  many  Massachusetts  towns  pay  no  atten- 
tion whatever  to  the  political  preferences  of  their  officials  in 
national  or  State  affairs.  There  are,  to  be  sure,  divisions  and 
contests  at  town  elections;  but  they  are  upon  such  questions  as 
the  advisability  of  constructing  a  system  of  sewerage  or  water 


52  NOMINATIONS  FOR  LOCAL   OFFICES.    [CHAP.  II. 

works,  or  the  creation  of  a  town  debt  for  some  permanent 
improvement.  Bodies  of  voters,  more  or  less  permanent,  dif- 
fer as  to  how  the  affairs  of  the  town  should  be  managed ;  and, 
accordingly,  we  find,  especially  in  the  larger  towns,  regularly- 
called  caucuses,  at  which  are  nominated  "Citizens'"  and 
"People's"  tickets  for  the  various  town  offices.1 

2.  Nominations  in  Cities.  In  the  nominations  for  city  offices 
we  find  an  entirely  different  state  of  things.  Party  lines  are 
drawn  as  strictly  in  most  municipal  elections  as  in  State  and 
national  affairs,  and  this  fact  has  long  been  recognized  as  one 
of  the  chief  causes  of  the  failure  of  municipal  government  in 
the  United  States. 

Exactly  the  same  system  of  nomination  is  in  vogue  as  in  the 
case  of  State  and  county  offices;  viz.,  the  primary  caucus  and 
the  delegate  convention.  In  most  cities  many  of  the  chief 
executive  officers  (such  as  the  treasurer,  auditor,  solicitor, 
engineer,  architect,  and  chief  of  police)  are  either  elected  by 
the  city  council  or  appointed  by  the  mayor.  Those  elective 
officers  who  are  voted  for  by  the  people  of  the  whole  city, 
including,  in  many  cases,  besides  the  mayor,  the  board  of 
aldermen  or  upper  branch  of  the  city  council,  the  school  com- 
mittee, and  comptroller,  are  usually  nominated  by  municipal 
conventions  composed  of  delegates  chosen  by  the  party  voters 
at  caucuses  or  primaries  in  the  different  wards  or  voting  pre- 
cincts. In  some  cities,  however,  the  system  of  primary  elec- 
tion is  in  vogue  in  municipal  nominations,  in  which  case  the 
individual  party  voter  casts  his  ballot  directly  for  candidates 
for  mayor  and  aldermen,  and  those  candidates  receiving  a 
plurality  of  all  the  votes  cast  in  the  city  are  declared  the  party 
nominees.  Where  the  aldermen  are  elected  by  districts,  can- 
didates for  that  office  are  usually  nominated  at  aldermanic  dis- 
trict conventions  composed  of  delegates  from  the  various  wards 
and  precincts  in  the  district. 

In  some  cities,  especially  in  Massachusetts,  the  members  of 
the  lower  branch  of  the  city  council  (usually  called  the  "  com- 
mon council  ")  are  elected  by  wards,  and  candidates  are  nomi- 

1  In  Appendix  B  will  be  found  a  copy  of  one  of  the  tickets  used  at  the  town 
meeting  held  at  Leicester,  Mass.,  in  March,  1894. 


SECT.  3-]        CAUCUSES  OR  PRIMARY  MEETINGS.  53 

nated  directly  at  ward  caucuses.  The  same  is  true  as  to  the 
nomination  of  candidates  for  the  lower  branch  of  the  State 
legislature,  where  a  single  ward  constitutes  a  representative 
district.  In  most  of  the  larger  cities,  however,  candidates  are 
nominated  by  conventions,  and  the  power  of  the  individual 
voter  is  restricted  to  the  choice  of  delegates. 

The  primaries  and  conventions  held  for  the  purpose  of  nomi- 
nating candidates  for  municipal  offices  are  called  by  the  city, 
town,  ward,  or  precinct  committees,  as  the  case  may  be,  and 
are  governed  by  substantially  the  same  procedure  as  the 
primaries  and  conventions  held  for  the  purpose  of  nominating 
State  and  county  officers,  which  will  be  described  later. 

3.  Caucuses  or  Primary  Meetings.2  Caucuses  or  primaries, 
whether  called  for  the  direct  nomination  of  candidates  or  for 
the  choice  of  delegates  to  a  convention,  are  governed  by  a  very 
simple  procedure.  In  fact,  in  New  England,  and  in  some  of 
the  older  Western  States,  they  are  simply  "town  meetings"  of 
the  party  voters.  In  many  of  the  States,  however,  the  prima- 
ries are  conducted  like  elections.  There  is  no  opportunity  for 
discussion.  They  are  simply  held  for  the  purpose  of  choosing 
delegates,  the  polls  being  open  a  certain  length  of  time,  as  in 
the  case  of  the  regular  election.  Some  of  the  States,  as  we 
shall  see,  have  passed  laws  regulating  the  holding  of  caucuses 
and  primaries  for  the  purpose  of  protecting  the  voters  against 
fraud  and  corruption.  In  the  absence  of  statutory  enactment, 
the  organization  and  conduct  of  these  primary  meetings  are 
governed  by  rules  adopted  by  the  party  committees  calling 
them,  and  by  custom.  Even  where  there  are  statutes  on  the 
subject,  the  law  is  often  supplemented  by  rules  made  by  the 
party  committee.  For  instance,  in  Boston,  no  person  is  per- 
mitted to  vote  in  a  Republican  caucus  unless  he  is  an  "enrolled 
Republican,"  that  is,  unless  his  name  has  been  entered  upon 
the  ward  committee's  list  of  Republican  voters  for  the  ward 
in  which  he  resides. 

2  In  New  England,  and  in  a  few  of  the  Western  States,  these  primary  meetings 
of  the  party  voters  are  called  caucuses.  In  the  Middle  States,  and  throughout  the 
greater  part  of  the  West,  such  meetings  are  known  as  primaries.  In  Pennsylvania, 
and  the  South,  as  well  as  in  the  statute  books  of  most  of  the  States  outside  of  New 
England,  they  are  called  primary  elections. 


54  NOMINATIONS  FOR  LOCAL   OFFICES.    [CHAP.  II. 

The  call  for  a  caucus  or  primary,  which  is  issued  by  the 
city  or  town  committee,  specifies  the  time  and  place  of  meet- 
ing, together  with  the  object  for  which  it  is  held ;  designates 
the  person  who  is  to  call  the  meeting  to  order,  or  the  officers 
who  are  to  have  charge  of  the  balloting,  as  the  case  may  be, 
and  usually  gives  an  abstract  of  the  more  important  rules 
which  are  to  govern  it.  It  is  signed  by  the  chairman  and 
secretary  of  the  committee.8 

In  those  States  where  the  primaries  are  simply  party  elec- 
tions, the  procedure  is  practically  the  same  as  at  the  regular 
election,  —  the  officers  in  charge  being  chosen  in  accordance 
with  the  party  rules.  Where  the  old-fashioned  caucus  pre- 
vails, however,  the  procedure  is  very  similar  to  that  of  the 
town  meeting.  Caucuses  held  for  the  choice  of  delegates  to 
the  different  conventions,  and  for  the  election  of  members  of 
the  city  or  town  committee  are,  as  a  rule,  very  quiet  affairs. 
Little  interest  is  manifested,  except  where  there  is  a  sharp 
contest  for  some  nomination  to  be  made  by  one  of  the  conven- 
tions, or  where  the  party  committee  which  is  to  be  chosen  is 
to  nominate  directly  or  indirectly  any  of  the  party  candidates.4 
On  the  other  hand,  where  the  caucus  nominates  a  candidate 
directly,  as  in  the  case  of  representatives  to  the  legislature  in 
some  parts  of  New  England,  and  in  the  case  of  nominations  for 
ward  and  town  officers,  the  attendance  is  usually  large,  and  the 
excitement  runs  high. 

The  meeting  is  called  to  order  by  the  person  designated 
in  the  call,  usually  the  chairman  of  the  ward  or  town  com- 
mittee, who  reads  a  copy  of  the  printed  call.  The  caucus  then 
proceeds  to  elect  a  chairman  and  secretary,  usually  by  a  viva 
voce  vote,  nominations  being  made  from  the  floor.  Candidates 
are  then  put  in  nomination  by  their  friends,  and  their  merits 
discussed  in  open  meeting.  This  very  valuable  feature  of  the 
old  New  England  caucus  is  unfortunately  somewhat  rare  in 

'  See  Appendix  B. 

*  For  instance,  in  Boston,  the  Democratic  city  committee  until  recently  nomi- 
nated the  party  candidate  for  mayor ;  while  in  New  York  City  the  General  Com- 
mittee of  Tammany  Hall  exercises  the  functions  of  a  county  convention.  In  those 
wards  where  a  party  is  in  a  hopeless  minority,  the  caucus  frequently  leaves  the 
nomination  of  candidates  for  minor  offices  to  the  ward  committee. 


SECT.  3-]        CAUCUSES  OR  PRIMARY  MEETINGS.  55 

ward  caucuses  in  the  large  cities,  although  in  the  country 
towns  it  is  still  to  be  found  in  all  its  old-time  vigor.  After 
the  names  and  qualifications  of  the  various  candidates  have 
been  presented,  a  committee  is  appointed  to  receive,  sort,  and 
count  the  ballots,  and  the  voting  begins.  In  Massachusetts, 
the  law  requires  that  the  voting  shall  be  by  ballot,  if  asked  for 
by  ten  voters,  in  which  case  the  official  voting  lists,  certified 
by  the  registrars  of  voters,  have  to  be  used.  No  one  is  allowed 
to  vote  unless  his  name  is  on  the  list.5  The  voters,  after  their 
names  are  checked  on  the  list,  pass  between  the  ballot  com- 
mittee, and  deposit  their  ballots.6  The  persons  receiving  the 
highest  number  of  votes  in  the  first  ballot  are  by  an  almost 
invariable  custom  declared  to  be  elected  or  nominated,  as  the 
case  may  be.  This  custom  is  due  to  the  unwillingness  of  the 
voters  to  devote  the  time  required  for  the  repeated  ballots 
necessary  to  a  majority  choice.  Where  there  is  no  opposition 
to  a  candidate,  or  to  a  set  of  delegates,  a  ballot  is  dispensed 
with,  and  the  nomination  or  election,  as  the  case  may  be,  is 
made  by  acclamation.  Where  the  law  or  the  party  rules  abso- 
lutely require  a  ballot,  nomination  by  acclamation  is  supple- 
mented by  a  vote  directing  the  secretary  of  the  caucus  to  cast 
one  ballot  for  the  candidate  nominated.7 

It  is  not  uncommon  for  the  caucus  to  pass  a  vote  instructing 
the  delegates  elected  to  a  coming  convention  to  vote  for  a 
particular  candidate  in  the  convention.  Again,  in  the  case  of 
direct  nominations  by  the  caucus,  candidates  for  the  State  leg- 
islature are  frequently  pledged,  if  elected  at  the  polls,  to  vote 

8  In  a  close  contest,  voters  are  frequently  challenged  by  the  friends  of  the  rival 
candidates,  on  the  ground  that  they  do  not  belong  to  the  party.  The  right  of  the 
challenged  party  to  vote  is  usually  determined  finally  by  vote  of  the  ward  or  town 
committee,  although  in  some  cases  it  is  left  for  the  caucus  to  decide. 

6  In  some  places,  instead  of  a  ballot,  names  are  suggested  from  the  floor,  and 
arranged  by  the  secretary  of  the  caucus  on  a  "  marking  list."     Then  each  voter  in 
turn  places  a  mark  against  the  names  of  those  for  whom  he  desires  to  vote.     This 
custom  is  very  similar  to  the  Australian  ballot  system,  which  has  been  introduced 
into  the  Boston  caucuses,  the  difference  between  the  two  being  that  in  the  system 
just  described,  the  ballot  is  made  up  in  open  meeting,  and  every  voter  marks  on  the 
same  tally  sheet. 

7  Each  delegate  to  a  convention  elected  at  a  caucus  or  primary  receives  a  "  cre- 
dential," signed  by  the  chairman  and  secretary,  which  is  evidence  of  his  title  to  a 
seat  in  the  convention.    For  a  copy  of  such  a  credential,  see  Appendix  B. 


56  NOMINATIONS  FOR  LOCAL  OFFICES.    [CHAP.  II. 

for  a  particular  person  for  United  States  senator.  As  a  rule, 
such  instructions  are  scrupulously  observed;  but  occasionally 
there  is  found  a  delegate  or  a  candidate  who  refuses  to  be 
bound  by  his  instructions,  and  insists  upon  using  his  own 
judgment.  In  such  a  contingency  the  only  redress  for  the 
voters  is  to  discipline  their  unruly  servant  at  the  next  caucus 
or  election. 

In  the  Middle  States  and  in  the  South,  the  party  primaries 
or  primary  elections,  as  they  are  called,  usually  lack  the  town- 
meeting  feature  of  the  old  New  England  caucus,  namely,  the 
discussion  in  open  meeting  of  the  merits  of  the  different  per- 
sons to  be  voted  for.  They  are,  as  their  name  implies,  elec- 
tions, their  sole  function  being  the  choice  of  delegates  and 
members  of  the  various  party  committees,  and,  in  the  smaller 
cities,  the  direct  nomination  of  candidates  for  some  of  the 
municipal  offices.  The  only  exception  to  this  rule  is  to  be 
found  in  the  "  Crawford  County "  8  system,  where  the  party 
voters  nominate  the  candidates  directly,  without  the  interven- 
tion of  delegate  conventions.  In  either  case,  however,  the 
primary  meetings  are  nothing  more  nor  less  than  elections 
held  in  the  different  election  districts  or  voting  precincts,  and 
differing  from  the  regular  legal  election  only  in  the  fact  that 
they  are  confined  to  the  voters  of  a  single  party.  The  polls 
are  kept  open  during  a  certain  specified  time,  and  the  ballot- 
ing is  conducted  by  officers  chosen  either  in  accordance  with 
the  party  rules  or  the  laws  of  the  State. 

4.  Preparation  for  Caucuses.  Before  leaving  the  subject  of 
the  primary  meeting,  which  forms  the  basis  of  our  entire  nomi- 
nating machinery,  reference  should  be  made  to  the  preliminary 
work  done  by  the  various  candidates  and  their  friends  previous 
to  the  holding  of  the  caucus  or  primary.9  On  the  day  of  the 

8  So  called  because  first  tried  in  Crawford  County,  Pennsylvania.     The  advan- 
tages and  disadvantages  of  the  system  will  be  discussed  in  a  later  chapter. 

9  Where  there  is  no  contest  for  the  nomination  or  for  places  in  the  various  sets 
of  delegates  to  be  elected,  this  preliminary  work  results  in  giving  the  proceedings 
of  the  caucus  or  primary  a  very  "  cut  and  dried  "  character.     Even  where  there 
is  a  contest,  the  choice  of  the  voter  is  practically  limited  to  one  or  the  other  of 
the  "  tickets  "  or  "  slates "  which  have  been  agreed  upon  beforehand  at  private 
conferences. 


SECT.  4]  PREPARATION  FOR   CAUCUSES.  57 

caucus,  where  there  is  a  contest  for  the  nomination,  printed 
ballots  are  distributed  at  the  polling  place,10  bearing  the  names 
of  candidates  and  sets  of  delegates  or  "slates"  agreed  upon 
beforehand  at  "parlor  caucuses."  These  "parlor  caucuses" 
are  private  meetings  of  the  friends  of  some  particular  candi- 
date or  candidates,  at  which  plans  are  made  for  controlling  the 
caucus.  This  is  perhaps  the  most  important  part  of  our  whole 
nominating  machinery:  for  here  are  formed  the  combinations 
which  determine  beforehand  the  action  of  the  caucus  in  a  man- 
ner often  impossible  for  the  ordinary  voter  to  comprehend  or 
to  combat.  If  Mr.  A.  wishes  to  be  nominated  for  the  State 
legislature,  he  holds  a  conference  with  his  friends.  He  there 
learns  that  B. ,  C.,  D.,  and  E.  are  also  desirous  of  being  the 
party  standard-bearers.  But  the  ward  is  entitled  to  only  two 
representatives,  so  that  three  of  the  five  contestants  will  have 
to  be  disappointed.  Now  comes  the  power  of  political  com- 
bination. The  most  obvious  thing  to  be  done  is  for  all  A. 's 
friends  to  attend  the  caucus  and  to  bring  out  as  many  of  their 
friends  as  possible.  The  next  thing  is  to  have  ballots  printed 
containing  A. 's  name  in  all  possible  combinations  with  the 
names  of  all  the  other  contestants.  Accordingly,  on  the  day 
of  the  caucus  there  will  be  distributed  at  the  polls  by  A. 's 
friends,  a  ballot  containing  the  name  of  A.  and  B.,  another 
with  the  names  of  A.  and  C.,  and  so  on.  In  this  way  A.  will 
secure  scattering  votes  from  the  friends  of  the  other  candidates 
in  addition  to  the  votes  of  his  own  friends.11  The  same  course 
being  pursued  by  the  friends  of  the  other  candidates,  the  result 
is  that  the  poor  voter  at  the  caucus  is  deluged  with  ballots 
differing  slightly  one  from  the  other.  Where  the  contest  is 
for  delegates  to  some  convention,  the  ward  being  entitled  per- 
haps to  ten  or  more  delegates,  the  situation  is  still  more 
complicated. 

Fully  as  interesting  as  the  methods  which  have  just  been 

10  These  ballots  are  distributed  either  by  volunteers  or  by  paid  distributors, 
in  the  large  cities  more  commonly  by  the  latter.      For  sample  ballots,  see  Appen- 
dix B. 

11  If  the  contest  is  very  close,  A.'s  special  friends  will  vote  for  A.  alone.     This 
is  known  as  voting  "  bullets,"  and  a  ticket  bearing  the  name  of  only  one  candidate, 
where  the  ward  is  entitled  to  more  than  one,  is  known  as  a  "  bullet  ticket." 


5g  NOMINATIONS  FOR  LOCAL   OFFICES.    [CHAP.  II. 

described,  is  the  preliminary  work  done  by  men  who  wish  to 
be  candidates  for  such  positions  as  State  senator  or  representa- 
tive in  Congress.  As  the  election  district  is  in  these  cases 
large,  the  nomination  is  made  at  a  delegate  convention.  The 
problem  before  the  aspirant  is  to  secure  the  election  of  enough 
delegates  favorable  to  his  candidacy  in  the  various  town  and 
ward  caucuses  or  primaries  of  the  district  to  give  him  a 
majority  of  the  votes  in  the  convention.  To  this  end  he 
either  personally,  or  through  his  friends,  makes  up  in  every 
town  and  ward  of  the  district  a  list  of  delegates  who,  if 
elected,  will  vote  for  his  nomination.  It  is  a  common  expe- 
dient for  a  weak  candidate  to  head  each  list  or  "ticket"  with 
the  names  of  well  known  and  highly  respected  citizens  who 
will  probably  not  attend  the  convention,  but  whose  credentials 
can  be  secured  through  mutual  friends.  Even  if  these  well 
known  citizens  turn  out  to  be  opposed  to  the  candidate, 
nevertheless  he  can  well  afford  to  lose  one  or  two  votes  for  the 
sake  of  securing  the  remainder  of  the  delegation  by  means  of 
this  unauthorized  use  of  one  or  two  strong  names. 

The  lists  thus  prepared  are  printed  and  distributed  at  the 

caucus,  sometimes  headed  "delegates  pledged  to  ,"  but 

more  often  without  any  designation,  or  else  falsely  marked 
"unpledged."  In  some  cases  two  different  tickets  of  dele- 
gates, both  favorable  to  the  same  person,  are  distributed  at 
the  caucus,  one  designated  as  pledged  to  a  particular  indi- 
vidual, and  the  other  marked  "unpledged"  to  catch  the  unsus- 
pecting citizen  of  independent  proclivities.  A  delegate 
elected  at  a  caucus,  who  is  either  expressly  or  tacitly  under- 
stood to  favor  a  particular  person,  is  usually  considered  in 
honor  bound  to  vote  for  that  person  in  the  convention.  And 
the  same  is  true  where  the  caucus,  by  vote,  instructs  the  dele- 
gates elected  to  vote  for  a  particular  candidate. 

In  many  localities  it  is  the  custom  for  some  of  the  represen- 
tative party  men  of  the  town  or  ward  to  hold  each  year  a  pri- 
vate conference  or  "parlor  caucus,"  at  which  a  complete  ticket 
of  delegates  to  the  various  conventions,  and  candidates  for  the 
ward  or  town  committee,  is  made  up.  Such  a  meeting  usually 
organizes  itself  by  choosing  a  chairman  and  secretary.  The 


SECT.  5.]     COMMITTEES  AND   THEIR  INFLUENCE.  59 

names  of  well  known  members  of  the  party  are  placed  upon 
the  ticket,  in  many  cases  without  any  means  of  knowing  how 
these  men,  if  elected,  will  vote  in  the  convention.  Where 
there  is  a  contest  for  delegates  to  any  particular  convention, 
and  the  members  of  the  "parlor  caucus"  are  divided  upon  the 
question,  either  a  compromise  ticket  is  agreed  upon,  or  else 
those  present  "agree  to  disagree,"  and  no  list  for  that  con- 
vention is  made  up  at  the  meeting.  Where  there  is  an 
agreement  upon  all  points,  all  the  lists  and  candidates  agreed 
upon  are  sometimes  printed  upon  one  ballot.  The  secretary 
of  the  meeting  usually  attends  to  the  printing  of  the  ballots 
and  their  distribution  on  the  night  of  the  caucus.12 

5.  Local  Committees  and  their  Influence  on  Nominations.  As 
has  already  been  stated,  in  every  city  and  town  each  political 
party  has  a  city  or  town  committee.  In  cities  there  are  also 
usually  ward  committees  and  in  some  cities  precinct  commit- 
tees. The  members  of  the  two  latter  are,  as  a  rule,  chosen  each 
year  at  a  caucus  or  primary  of  party  voters  in  the  ward  or  pre- 
cinct, and  the  city  committee  is  usually  composed  of  the  mem- 
bers of  the  various  ward  and  precinct  organizations,  or  of 
delegations  from  them.13 

The  nomination  of  candidates  was  never  intended  to  be 
included  among  the  duties  of  these  local  committees,  —  their 
function  being  rather  to  take  all  legitimate  means  to  secure 
the  election  of  the  party  candidates  after  they  have  once  been 
nominated.  Ordinarily,  their  only  official  connection  with 
nominations  is  the  power  usually  given  them  of  filling  vacan- 
cies in  cases  where  the  calling  of  another  caucus  would  be 
inconvenient.  In  some  cases,  however,  especially  where  the 
party  holding  the  caucus  is  in  a  hopeless  minority,  the  power 
of  making  nominations  and  of  choosing  delegates  is  intrusted 
by  the  caucus  or  primary  to  the  local  committee. 

But  far  more  important  than  this  is  the  unofficial  connection 

11  See  Appendix  B. 

18  For  instance,  in  Boston,  the  Republican  city  committee  is  composed  of  the 
members  of  the  different  ward  committees.  Each  ward  committee  is  composed  of 
five  members,  and  one  additional  member  for  every  two  hundred  Republican  voters 
over  one  thousand  at  the  preceding  presidential  election.  (Rule  2  of  the  Rules  of 
the  Republican  Party  of  Boston,  1893.) 


60  NOMINATIONS  FOR  LOCAL   OFFICES.    [CHAP.  II. 

between  the  local  committees  and  the  primary  meetings.  In 
very  many  places  it  is  customary  for  the  members  of  the  ward 
or  town  committee  to  make  up  a  ticket  or  "slate,"  as  it  is 
sometimes  called,  of  candidates  and  delegates  previous  to  the 
caucus,  and  in  some  cases  the  source  of  the  ticket  is  distinctly 
stated  on  the  printed  ballot.14  The  unfortunate  part  of  this 
assumption  of  the  right  to  suggest  names  by  the  committee  is 
that,  owing  to  the  lack  of  interest  in  political  affairs,  the 
"  slate  "  prepared  by  the  local  committee  is  pretty  apt  to  be 
successful  at  the  caucus,  the  proceedings  of  the  latter  being, 
in  consequence,  very  much  "cut  and  dried."  As  a  result, 
respectable  citizens  who  take  the  trouble  to  attend  are  dis- 
gusted with  the  whole  thing,  while,  on  the  other  hand,  posi- 
tions on  the  local  committee  are  eagerly  sought  after,  not  from 
an  unselfish  desire  to  work  for  the  interests  of  the  party,  but 
in  order  to  secure  control  over  nominations. 

Still  more  important  in  its  influence  on  nominations  is  the 
power  given  to  the  local  committee  of  calling  the  caucuses, 
and  especially  of  making  rules  for  governing  their  procedure. 
It  is  the  abuse  of  this  latter  function  that  has  given  the  machine 
its  great  power  in  New  York  and  in  other  large  cities.  The 
evolution  has  been  a  very  natural  one.  It  is  necessary,  of 
course,  that  there  should  be  some  rule  governing  the  right 
to  vote  at  the  party  primaries.  In  the  large  cities,  this  is 
usually  provided  for  by  restricting  the  privilege  to  voters  who 
have  been  registered  in  the  books  of  the  ward  or  precinct 
committee,  — the  object  being  to  prevent  voters  of  the  oppo- 
site party  from  taking  part  in  the  primary.  Now  it  is  very 
easy,  by  making  very  rigid  requirements  (such  as,  for  in- 
stance, that  the  applicant  shall  take  oath  to  support  all  can- 
didates who  may  be  nominated,  regardless  of  their  character 
or  fitness),  to  keep  the  ward  or  precinct  list  of  party  voters 
small  and  "select."  Then,  by  further  requiring  that  every 
applicant  for  enrollment  must  receive  a  majority  vote  of  the 
enrolled  voters  present  at  any  meeting,  the  control  of  nomina- 
tions is  placed  absolutely  in  the  hands  of  a  self-perpetuating 
club,  and  the  primary  becomes  a  ridiculous  farce.  As  we 

14  This  has  frequently  been  the  case  in  Democratic  caucuses  in  Boston. 


SECT.  6.]      NOMINATIONS  FOR  COUNTY  OFFICES.  6 1 

shall  see,  this  has  been  exactly  the  situation  in  New  York 
city.  Even  where  things  have  not  gone  so  far  as  this,  it  is 
evident  that  an  unscrupulous  committee,  vested  with  the 
power  of  deciding  finally  on  the  qualifications  of  voters,  is 
enabled  to  control  the  caucus  as  it  sees  fit,  and  to  keep  itself 
in  power  against  the  wishes  of  the  party  voters  of  the  district. 
In  view  of  the  abuse  which  at  present  exists  in  this  regard,  it 
would  seem  that  the  power  of  making  rules  for  the  government 
of  caucuses  and  primaries  ought  to  be  vested  in  the  party 
voters  themselves,  and  never  delegated  to  the  local  committee. 
The  function  of  the  latter  should  be  confined  to  enforcing  the 
rules  as  they  exist. 

6.  Nominations  for  County  Offices.  Candidates  for  the  various 
county  offices  —  e.g.,  county  commissioner,  sheriff,  treasurer, 
auditor,  register  of  deeds,  register  of  probate,  clerk  of  courts, 
district  attorney,  and  in  many  States  judges  of  the  county  courts 
—  are,  as  a  rule,  nominated  by  county  conventions  composed  of 
delegates  from  the  various  cities  and  towns  in  the  county. 

The  call  for  such  a  convention  is  issued  by  the  county  com- 
mittee,15 and  the  number  of  delegates  to  which  each  city  and 
town  is  entitled  is  stated  in  the  call.16 

The  procedure  of  a  county  convention  is  usually  very  sim- 
ple. It  is  called  to  order  by  the  chairman  of  the  county  com- 
mittee, who  reads  the  call.  The  first  business  in  order  is  the 
choice  of  a  temporary  chairman  and  secretary,  after  which  a 
committee  on  credentials  is  appointed  for  the  purpose  of  ascer- 
taining what  delegates  are  present  and  entitled  to  seats  in  the 
convention.  In  case  there  are  two  sets  of  delegates  from  any 
city  or  town,  each  claiming  to  be  the  rightful  delegates,  the 
committee  on  credentials  gives  a  hearing  to  the  parties  con- 
cerned, and  makes  its  report  to  the  convention,  which  is 
usually  accepted  as  a  matter  of  course.  After  the  report  of 
the  committee  on  credentials,  it  is  customary  to  pass  a  motion 
that  the  temporary  organization  be  made  permanent. 

15  The  county  committee  consists  of  one  or  more  members  from  each  town  and 
city  within  the  county,  and  is  chosen  either  by  the  convention  or  at  the  primaries. 

16  In  Massachusetts  the  basis  of  apportionment  of  delegates  for  all  the  minor 
conventions  is  the  same  as  that  for  the  State  convention.     Seejost,  chapter  iii.  §  2. 


62  NOMINATIONS  FOR  LOCAL  OFFICES.    [CHAP.  II. 

The  convention  then  proceeds  to  make  nominations  for  the 
various  offices  in  the  order  mentioned  in  the  call.  A  com- 
mittee is  appointed  "to  receive,  sort,  and  count  the  ballots." 
After  nominating  speeches  have  been  made  in  behalf  of  the 
various  aspirants,  a  ballot  is  taken,  the  committee  either  pass- 
ing the  boxes  to  the  members,  or,  as  is  more  common,  the 
delegates  passing  in  front  of  the  chairman's  desk,  between 
the  members  of  the  committee  and  depositing  their  ballots. 
Where  there  is  no  contest  for  the  nomination,  as  is  frequently 
the  case  in  county  affairs,  a  ballot  is  dispensed  with,  and  the 
nomination  is  made  by  acclamation.  This  is  especially  the 
case  with  old  and  faithful  officials,  who  are  frequently  kept  in 
office  as  long  as  they  are  willing  to  serve. 

After  the  candidates  have  been  nominated,  a  county  com- 
mittee for  the  ensuing  year  is  elected,17  and  other  routine  busi- 
ness transacted,  after  which  the  convention  adjourns  sine  die. 

The  only  exception  to  the  usual  method  of  nomination  for 
county  office  by  delegate  conventions  is  to  be  found  in  the 
"  Crawford  County  "  system,  the  advantages  and  limitations  of 
which  will  be  considered  in  a  later  chapter. 

17  I.  e.  where  the  county  committee  is  chosen  by  the  convention. 


CHAPTER   III. 

NOMINATIONS   FOR  STATE   OFFICES. 

I.  The  General  System.  In  the  States,  as  in  the  nation,  a 
large  proportion  of  the  executive  officers  are  appointed:  for 
example,  the  members  of  the  various  State  commissions,  the 
clerks  and  assistants  in  the  various  executive  departments,  and 
in  many  States  the  judges.  With  offices  filled  by  appointment 
we  have  no  present  concern,  since  the  nominating  machinery 
applies  only  to  positions  filled  by  election. 

For  the  sake  of  convenience,  we  will  consider  first,  the  nom- 
ination of  candidates  on  the  "State  ticket,"  namely,  those 
to  be  voted  for  at  large  by  the  people  of  the  whole  State; 
second,  the  nomination  of  candidates  for  the  two  branches  of 
the  State  legislature;  and,  finally,  nominations  for  the  various 
offices  of  the  State  Senate  and  House  of  Representatives. 

The  officers  voted  for  by  the  people  at  large  are  a  governor, 
and  a  lieutenant-governor,  a  secretary  of  State,  a  State  treas- 
urer, and,  in  most  States,  an  auditor  and  an  attorney-general. 
In  addition  to  these,  many  States  elect  a  comptroller,  a  super- 
intendent of  public  instruction,  a  State  engineer,  a  surveyor, 
and  a  superintendent  of  prisons.  In  the  States  which  have  an 
elective  judiciary,  the  judges  of  the  Supreme  Court  and  of  the 
Court  of  Appeals,  where  one  exists,  are  also  voted  for  by  the 
people  of  the  whole  State.  Candidates  for  all  these  offices 
are  everywhere  nominated  by  State  conventions,  composed  of 
delegates  chosen  by  the  party  voters,  either  directly  at  prima- 
ries in  the  cities  and  towns,  or  indirectly  by  county  or  district 
conventions. 


64  NOMINATIONS  FOR  STATE  OFFICES.    [CHAP.  III. 

2.  State  Conventions.  The  call  for  a  State  convention  of  a 
party  is  issued  by  the  State  central  committee.1  A  printed 
copy  of  the  call  is  sent  to  the  chairman  of  each  city  and  town 
committee,  or  of  each  county  committee,  in  the  State.  This 
call  states  the  time  and  place  of  meeting  of  the  convention, 
and  also  the  number  of  delegates  to  which  each  city,  town,  or 
county  is  entitled.  In  the  matter  of  apportionment  of  dele- 
gates, there  is  a  wide  difference  in  practice  between  State 
and  national  conventions.  In  the  latter,  each  State  is  entitled 
to  twice  as  many  delegates  as  it  has  electoral  votes,  regardless 
of  the  party  strength  in  the  State;  while  in  State  conventions, 
as  a  general  rule,  the  representation  of  the  different  counties 
or  municipalities  is  based  to  a  greater  or  less  extent  upon  the 
vote  cast  for  the  party  candidates  at  the  preceding  State  or 
national  election.  For  example,  at  the  Massachusetts  Repub- 
lican Convention  of  1893,  each  town  and  each  ward  of  a  city 
was  entitled  to  one  delegate  and  to  one  additional  delegate  for 
every  fifty  votes  or  fraction  thereof  cast  for  the  Republican 
candidate  for  governor  at  the  preceding  election. 

The  usual  procedure  of  a  State  convention,  although  not  so 
elaborate  as  that  of  a  national  convention,  is,  nevertheless, 
rather  complex.  It  is  called  to  order  by  the  chairman  of  the 
State  committee,  who  usually  asks  the  secretary  of  the  com- 
mittee to  read  the  call  for  the  convention.  The  proceedings 
are  then  formally  opened  with  prayer,  after  which  motions  are 
made  and  carried  for  the  appointment  by  the  chair  of  a  com- 
mittee on  credentials,  a  committee  on  permanent  organization, 
and  a  committee  on  resolutions.2  It  is  customary  for  the  dele- 
gate making  the  motion  in  each  case  to  be  named  as  chairman 

1  The  constitution  and  mode  of  election  of  the  State  committee  differs  in  differ- 
ent States.     In  Massachusetts  the  State  committee  of  both  parties  consists  of  one 
member  from  each  of  the  forty  senatorial  districts,  elected  by  the  senatorial  district 
convention  at  the  same  time  that  candidates  for  the  State  Senate  are  nominated. 
In  many  of  the  States  the  members  are  elected  by  the  county  conventions  ;  but  in 
New  York  the  entire  Democratic  State  committee  is  chosen  by  the  State  conven- 
tion.    In  other  States  the  two  methods  are  combined. 

2  The  constitution  of  these  committees  varies,  of  course,  in  different  States.     In 
Massachusetts  Republican  conventions  each  committee  consists  of  one  member  at 
large,  and  one  from  each  congressional  district. 


SECT.  3.]     PROCEDURE  OF  STATE   CONVENTIONS.  65 

of  the  committee  which  he  proposes;  but  his  privilege  of 
making  such  a  motion  has  been  determined  beforehand  by  the 
all-powerful  State  committee. 

There  is  often  no  formal  action  taken  by  way  of  temporary 
organization,  —  the  chairman  and  secretary  of  the  State  com- 
mittee acting  temporarily  until  the  committee  on  permanent 
organization  has  made  its  report.  The  permanent  officers  con- 
sist of  a  president,  a  secretary,  and  several  assistant  secreta- 
ries, together  with  a  portentous  list  of  honorary  vice-presidents 
and  secretaries.  The  only  object  in  naming  these  honorary 
officers  is  to  give  official  recognition  to  prominent  and  faithful 
party  workers  in  the  different  parts  of  the  State. 

On  taking  the  chair,  the  president  of  the  convention,  who 
is  usually  some  prominent  man,  proceeds  to  deliver  a  carefully 
prepared  speech  upon  the  issues  of  the  campaign,  the  telling 
points  of  which  are  greeted  with  laughter  and  applause.  After 
the  president's  speech,  which  is  the  first  shot  of  the  campaign, 
comes  the  report  of  the  committee  on  credentials,  consisting 
of  a  statement  of  the  number  of  delegates  present,  together 
with  a  decision  in  the  case  of  any  contested  seats.  Then  fol- 
lows the  reading  of  the  platform  by  the  chairman  of  the  com- 
mittee on  resolutions,  who  is  usually  one  of  the  leaders  of  the 
party.  As  the  reading  progresses,  the  various  paragraphs  are 
greeted  with  applause,  differing  in  volume  according  to  the 
importance  of  the  question  and  the  opinions  of  the  delegates. 
The  resolution  or  "plank"  that  is  most  vigorously  applauded 
is  usually  that  indorsing  or  condemning  the  national  adminis- 
tration, according  as  the  party  holding  the  convention  is  in  or 
out  of  power  at  Washington. 

3.  Nominating  Procedure  of  State  Conventions.  After  the  read- 
ing of  the  resolutions,  which  are  practically  never  altered  or 
amended,  the  convention  settles  down  to  its  real  business, 
the  nomination  of  candidates  for  the  various  State  offices.  A 
motion  is  made  and  carried  for  the  appointment  by  the  chair 
of  a  committee  to  take  charge  of  the  balloting  and  to  count  the 
ballots  after  they  have  been  cast.  Thereupon  the  president 
gravely  announces  that  "  the  chair  will  appoint  the  following 
committee,"  and  proceeds  to  read  off  a  list  of  names  agreed 

5 


66  NOMINATIONS  FOR  STATE  OFFICES.    [CHAP.  II L 

upon  by  the  State  committee  weeks  beforehand;  he  then 
declares  that  "nominations  for  the  office  of  governor  are  now 
in  order,"  whereupon  nominating  speeches  are  made  in  behalf 
of  the  various  candidates.3 

Up  to  this  point,  the  entire  proceedings  of  the  convention 
have  been  pre-arranged  by  the  State  committee.  Occasionally, 
to  be  sure,  some  member  attempts  to  bring  forward  a  pet  reso- 
lution ;  but  the  convention  almost  invariably  refuses  to  consider 
it.4  Without  this  pre-arrangement  of  the  routine  part  of  their 
work,  the  State  conventions  could  not  accomplish  their  busi- 
ness.6 They  are  usually  very  large  assemblages,  the  number 
of  delegates  being  always  several  hundred,  and  frequently 
more  than  a  thousand  ;6  and  in  many  States  they  complete  their 
work  in  a  single  day.7  Should  the  convention  undertake  to 
choose  its  own  officers  and  appoint  its  own  committees  on  the 
spur  of  the  moment,  there  would  be  endless  confusion,  and  it 
would  probably  take  several  days  to  reach  the  real  object  for 
which  it  was  convened:  viz.,  the  nomination  of  the  party 
candidates.  Under  the  present  system,  however,  the  prelimi- 
nary proceedings  are  usually  completed  in  a  few  hours.  Again, 
the  presiding  officer,  being  designated  long  beforehand,  has  an 
opportunity  to  prepare  an  able  and  interesting  speech,  while 
the  committee  on  resolutions  are  given  ample  time  to  formu- 
late a  platform  which  shall  be  concise  and,  at  the  same  time, 

*  It  is  usually  determined  beforehand  by  each  candidate  or  his  friends,  who  shall 
present  his  name  to  the  convention,  and  who  shall  second  the  nomination. 

4  If  any  individual  member  of  the  party  or  any  delegate  desires  to  have  a  cer- 
tain idea  incorporated  into  the  party  platform,  his  only  course  of  action  is  to  en- 
deavor to  prevail  upon  the  committee  on  resolutions  (who  usually  meet  before  the 
day  of  the  convention)  to  adopt  his  suggestions. 

6  The  opinion  here  expressed  in  regard  to  the  wisdom  and  necessity  of  having 
the  State  committee  arrange  the  preliminary  work  of  the  convention  refers  only  to 
the  proceedings  previous  to  the  balloting.  The  formation  of  any  pre-arranged  plan 
on  the  part  of  the  State  committee  to  influence  nominations,  as  is  frequently  the 
case,  notably  in  New  York  and  Pennsylvania,  is  to  be  severely  condemned. 

6  At  the  Massachusetts  Republican  Convention  of  1894  there  were  over  two 
thousand  delegates  present. 

7  In  Massachusetts,  the  Republican  State  Convention  meets  at  ten  or  eleven 
o'clock  in  the  morning,  and  usually  adjourns  by  four  o'clock  in  the  afternoon  of  the 
same  day,  having  carried  out,  to  the  satisfaction  of  the  rank  and  file  of  the  party, 
the  object  for  which  it  was  called  together. 


SECT.  3-]     PROCEDURE  OF  STATE  CONVENTIONS.  fy 

complete  and  satisfactory  to  all  wings  of  the  party.  In  short, 
by  having  the  necessary  preliminary  work  carefully  arranged  by 
an  efficient  State  committee,  everything  goes  along  smoothly 
on  the  day  of  the  convention,  and  the  convention  itself  is 
enabled  to  perform  its  important  work  with  promptness  and 
despatch. 

Nominating  speeches  in  behalf  of  the  leading  candidates  are 
usually  made  by  men  high  up  in  the  councils  of  the  party. 
At  the  Republican  Convention  in  Massachusetts,  in  1893, 
there  was  witnessed  the  remarkable  spectacle  of  a  candidate 
for  governor  being  placed  in  nomination  by  his  two  rivals  for 
the  nomination.  One  of  them  urged,  in  an  earnest  and  elo- 
quent speech,  that  he  be  nominated  by  acclamation,  and  the 
other  seconded  the  proposal.8 

Where  there  is  more  than  one  candidate  for  the  nomination, 
a  ballot  is  taken,  the  delegates  walking  up  either  by  counties 
or  districts  and  depositing  their  ballots,  or  remaining  in  their 
seats  while  the  ballots  are  collected  by  tellers.  When  a  can- 
didate has  received  the  number  of  votes  required  for  a  nomi- 
nation, —  usually  a  majority  of  all  the  votes  cast,  —  it  is 
customary  for  the  friends  of  the  defeated  candidates  to  move 
that  his  nomination  be  made  unanimous.  This  motion  is  gen- 
erally carried.  The  convention  then  proceeds  in  the  same 
manner  to  nominate  candidates  for  the  other  offices  on  the 
State  ticket.  In  the  New  England  States,  if  the  party  hold- 
ing the  convention  is  in  control  of  the  State  government,  the 
incumbents  of  the  various  offices  are  usually  re-nominated  by 
acclamation  until  their  term  of  service  reaches  a  number  of 
years  prescribed  by  custom.  According  to  an  unwritten  law 
of  the  Republican  party  in  Massachusetts,  a  governor  is 
entitled  to  two  successive  re-nominations,  if  he  be  not  defeated 
at  his  second  trial,  while  the  other  elective  State  officers  are 

8  Hon.  Frederick  T.  Greenhalge  was  placed  in  nomination  by  Hon.  Albert  E. 
Pillsbury,  and  the  nomination  was  seconded  by  Hon.  Thomas  N.  Hart.  It  was  of 
course  known  when  the  convention  assembled  that  a  majority  of  the  delegates 
chosen  were  favorable  to  Mr.  Greenhalge  for  governor.  In  this  case  the  real  fight 
for  the  nomination  had  taken  place  in  the  primary  caucuses  throughout  the  State, 
the  friends  of  each  of  the  three  candidates  endeavoring  to  secure  as  many  delegates 
as  possible  favorable  to  their  man. 


68  NOMINATIONS  FOR  STATE  OFFICES.    [CHAP.  III. 

allowed  to  remain  at  least  five  years  in  office.9  Moreover,  in 
Massachusetts,  as  well  as  in  some  other  States,  lieutenant- 
governors  frequently  succeed  their  chiefs. 

While  the  convention  is  waiting  for  its  committee  to  count 
the  votes,  in  case  a  ballot  is  taken  on  any  or  all  of  the  offi- 
cers, the  president  frequently  calls  upon  some  prominent  party 
leader,  generally  of  national  reputation,  to  entertain  the  dele- 
gates with  a  speech. 

After  the  nominations  for  governor  and  lieutenant-governor 
have  been  made,  a  motion  is  made  and  carried  for  the  appoint- 
ment by  the  chair  of  a  committee  to  notify  the  nominees  of  the 
action  of  the  convention,  and  to  escort  them  to  the  hall.  This 
committee  consists  usually  of  the  rival  candidates,  if  they 
happen  to  be  delegates,  or  of  those  who  have  managed  their 
respective  campaigns.  When  the  entire  State  ticket  has  been 
nominated,  this  committee  appears  upon  the  platform,  amid 
the  most  tumultuous  applause,  accompanied  by  the  nominees 
for  governor  and  lieutenant-governor  (who  are  expected  to  be 
in  waiting).  The  candidates  are  then  introduced  by  the  presi- 
dent of  the  convention  as  "the  next  governor"  and  as  "the 
next  lieutenant-governor  "  of  the  State,  whereupon  each 
responds  in  a  short  speech,  thanking  the  convention  for  the 
honor,  and  solemnly  pledging  his  best  efforts  towards  carrying 
the  party  banner  to  victory. 

4.  Nomination  of  Minor  State  Officers.  The  account  which 
has  just  been  given,  is  of  a  State  convention  where  a  candidate 
for  governor  is  nominated.  In  those  States  which  elect  their 
governor  for  a  term  of  years,  the  State  conventions  held  in  the 
"  off  years  "  —  i.e.,  years  when  only  candidates  for  some  of  the 
minor  State  offices  are  to  be  nominated  —  are  much  simpler 
in  their  organization  and  procedure  than  the  typical  convention 
just  described. 

In  some  cases,  even  where  a  candidate  is  nominated  for  the 
governorship,  the  question  of  the  nomination  of  candidates  for 
the  minor  offices  on  the  State  ticket  is  referred  by  the  State 
convention  to  a  committee,  which  reports  a  list  of  candidates 
to  the  convention.  This  was  the  method  adopted  by  the 
9  In  Massachusetts,  all  elective  State  officers  are  elected  annually. 


SECT.  5.]    PREPARATION  FOR  STATE  CONVENTIONS.       69 

Massachusetts  Democratic  Convention  of  1893.  In  other 
cases,  such  nominations  are  left  to  the  State  committee,  with 
full  powers.  Both  of  these  modes  of  procedure,  however,  are 
adopted  only  where  there  is  apparently  no  probability  of  the 
election  of  the  party  candidates. 

Nominations  for  the  smaller  State  offices,  even  by  the  con- 
vention of  a  minority  party,  are  often  sought  for  their  influence 
on  the  future  political  fortunes  of  a  man:  it  brings  him  be- 
fore the  public;  it  pleases  his  local  constituency;  and  it 
frequently  secures  for  him  the  appointment  to  a  State  or 
national  office. 

5.  Preparation  for  State  Conventions.  In  the  preceding  chapter 
we  discussed  the  important  preliminary  work  done  by  candi- 
dates and  their  friends  in  connection  with  the  caucuses  and 
primaries.  Fully  as  important  is  the  preparation  for  the  State 
convention. 

Where  the  party  machinery  of  the  State  has  fallen  into  the 
hands  of  "machine"  men,  the  nomination  of  candidates  on  the 
State  ticket  is  very  largely  dictated  by  the  State  committee. 
Wherever  possible,  the  committee,  through  its  influence  on 
the  district  and  local  committees,  secures  the  election  of  dele- 
gates to  the  State  convention  favorable  to  its  own  slate,  —  in 
which  case  the  proceedings  of  the  convention  are  most  har- 
monious. In  case  of  a  revolt  against  the  machine,  however, 
the  committee,  by  its  control  of  the  organization  of  the  con- 
vention, and  consequently  of  the  appointment  of  the  com- 
mittee on  credentials,  is  able  to  unseat  a  sufficient  number  of 
the  anti-machine  delegates  (filling  their  places  with  its  own 
friends)  to  nominate  whomsoever  it  pleases. 

But  in  those  States  where  the  State  committee  does  not 
abuse  the  power  intrusted  to  it,  and  simply  acts  as  the  servant 
and  not  the  master  of  the  rank  and  file  of  the  party,  the  latter 
nominate  their  candidates,  in  fact,  as  well  as  in  theory.  The 
procedure  is  commonly  as  follows.  The  friends  of  some  well 
known  man  start  a  "  boom  "  for  him  for  the  nomination  for 
governor.  Such  a  boom  usually  originates,  so  far  as  its  public 
announcement  is  concerned,  at  a  meeting  of  some  political  or 
social  club  to  which  the  candidate  belongs.  Certain  party 


70  NOMINATIONS  FOR  STATE  OFFICES.    [CHAP.  III. 

newspapers,  particularly  in  the  section  of  the  State  in  which 
the  candidate  resides,  take  up  the  movement  and,  until  the 
meeting  of  the  convention,  continue  to  extol  their  candidate's 
merits  and  to  urge  his  nomination.  The  candidate's  friends 
in  each  small  section  of  the  State  then  proceed  to  hold  parlor 
caucuses,  at  which  they  formulate  plans  for  capturing  the 
primaries  in  their  favorite's  interest.10 

After  the  primaries  throughout  the  State  have  been  held, 
the  managers  of  the  candidate's  campaign  reckon  up  the  num- 
ber of  delegates  elected  pledged  to  vote  for  their  man,  as  well 
as  the  number  pledged  to  each  of  the  other  aspirants  for  the 
nomination.  There  usually  remains,  however,  a  considerable 
number  of  unpledged  delegates ;  and,  in  case  of  a  close  contest, 
a  hot  fight  takes  place  to  secure  as  many  as  possible  of  these 
doubtful  votes.  The  managers  of  each  aspirant's  campaign 
open  headquarters  in  some  leading  hotel  of  the  city  in  which 
the  convention  is  to  be  held,  and  there,  on  the  night  before 
the  convention,  the  delegates  are  royally  entertained,  particu- 
larly the  doubtful  ones,  the  candidate  himself  holding  an 
informal  reception.11 

On  the  day  of  the  convention,  the  candidate's  friends  are  to 
be  found  at  the  door  of  the  convention  hall,  and  on  the  floor 
of  the  convention  itself,  busily  engaged  in  button-holing  the 
delegates  in  favor  of  their  man.  Their  work  does  not  stop 
until  the  result  of  the  final  ballot  is  announced,  and  their 
favorite  is  either  "  landed  "  or  defeated. 

Combinations  or  "deals"  are  frequently  made  by  a  candi- 
date's friends,  by  which  votes  are  obtained  for  their  man  in 
return  for  votes  for  a  particular  aspirant  for  some  other  office 
on  the  State  ticket ;  while  in  some  cases  a  rival  candidate  is 
induced  to  withdraw  "in  the  interest  of  harmony,"  by  the 
promise  of  future  support  for  some  other  State  or  national 

10  Where   the   people   thus   nominate   their  candidates,  it  is   essential  that  a 
would-be  candidate  for  governor  should  be  sufficiently  well  known  to  have  friends 
in  all  parts  of  the  State  who  are  ready  and  willing  to  work  to  secure  the  election  of 
delegates  favorable  to  him  at  the  primaries  in  their  respective  neighborhoods. 

11  In  Massachusetts,  the  old  Tremont  House  in  Boston,  which  stood  across  the 
street  from  the  hall  where  the  State  conventions  were  usually  held,  was  long  the 
favorite  meeting-place  of  the  contending  factions. 


SECT.  7.]    NOMINATIONS  FOR  STATE  LEGISLATURE.         ji 

office.  As  in  the  case  of  elections,  bribery  is  sometimes 
resorted  to  in  an  exceedingly  close  contest ;  but  such  cases  are 
rare. 

6.  Executive  Councillors  and  Judges.     For  the   sake   of  com- 
pleteness, it  should  be  noted  that  besides  the  officers  voted 
for  by  the  people  of  the  entire  State,  and  members  of  the  legis- 
lature, there  is  frequently  another  group  of  elected  State  offi- 
cials, such,  for  instance,  as  the  Massachusetts  Executive  Coun- 
cil.12   The  members  of  this  body  are  elected  annually  by  the 
people,  the  State  being  divided,  for  this  purpose,   into  seven 
large  districts,  each  of  which  returns  one  councillor.     Candi- 
dates for  the  Executive  Council  are  nominated  by  councillor 
conventions.13    These  conventions  are  composed  of  delegates 
from  the  various  cities  and  towns  of  the  councillor  district. 
The  procedure  is  exactly  the  same  as  that  of  the  county  con- 
vention, which  has  been  described  in  a  preceding  chapter. 

In  those  States  which  have  an  elective  judiciary,  between 
the  judges  of  the  highest  courts  who  are  nominated  by  the 
State  convention,  and  the  county  judges  who  are  nominated 
by  county  conventions,  there  is  often  a  third  class ;  namely,  the 
judges  of  the  Superior  Court,  for  whose  election  the  State  is 
divided  into  large  districts.  Candidates  for  these  judgeships 
are  nominated  by  district  conventions  similar  to  the  councillor 
conventions  just  mentioned. 

7.  Nominations  for  the  State  Legislature.     Candidates  for  the 
State  Senate,  or  Upper  House  of  the  Legislature,  are  usually 
nominated   at   senatorial  conventions   composed  of   delegates 
chosen  at  caucuses  or  primaries  of  the  party  voters  in  the  cities 
and  towns  situated  in  the  particular  district.     Such   conven- 
tions are  called  by  the  senatorial  district  committee,  and  the 
assemblage  is  called  to  order  by  the  chairman  of  that  com- 
mittee.    The  procedure   is  the   same   as  that  of  the  county 
convention. 

Nominations  for  the  lower  branch  of  the  legislature,  in  case 
the  district  includes  more  than  one  town  or  ward  of  a  city, 

18  The  Executive  Council,  which  exists  also  in  New  Hampshire  and  Connec- 
ticut, is  a  relic  of  colonial  times. 

18  Councillor  conventions  are  called  by  the  councillor  district  committee. 


72  NOMINATIONS  FOR  STATE  OFFICES.    [CHAP.  III. 

are  made  by  conventions  similar  to  those  already  described. u 
Where,  however,  a  single  town  or  ward  of  a  city  constitutes  a 
representative  district,  the  nomination  of  the  candidate  or 
candidates16  is  made  directly  by  the  party  voters  at  a  single 
caucus  or  primary  meeting.18  Such  a  caucus  is  conducted  in 
exactly  the  same  manner  as  one  held  for  the  choice  of  dele- 
gates to  the  various  conventions.  In  Massachusetts,  previous 
to  the  passage  of  the  Caucus  Act  of  1894,  it  was  the  custom  for 
delegates  to  the  various  conventions,  together  with  the  mem- 
bers of  the  ward  or  town  committee,  to  be  chosen  at  one  and 
the  same  caucus,  while  candidates  for  representative  were 
nominated  at  a  subsequent  caucus  called  for  that  particular 
purpose.  In  1894,  for  the  first  time  in  the  case  of  the  Repub- 
lican party,  everything  was  done  at  a  single  caucus. 

8.  The  Nomination  of  Officers  elected  by  the  Legislature.  There 
remains  one  set  of  State  officers, — the  various  officials  of  the 
two  branches  of  the  legislature,  such  as  the  speaker  of  the 
House,  the  president  of  the  Senate,  the  clerks  of  the  two 
branches,  and  the  sergeant-at-arms.  Candidates  for  these 
offices  are  nominated  at  a  caucus  of  the  party  members  of  the 
Senate  or  House,  as  the  case  may  be. 

The  contest  in  the  majority  party  for  the  caucus  nomination 
for  speaker  of  the  lower  branch  is  frequently  as  keen  as  in 
the  case  of  the  speaker  of  the  national  House,  and  for  the 
same  reason,  —  the  speaker's  power,  especially  the  power 
of  appointing  all  the  committees.17  Whenever  such  a  contest 

14  In  many  of  the  States,  the  State  is  divided  into  senatorial  and  also  into  repre- 
sentative or  assembly  districts,  the  lines  of  the  two  sets  crossing  one  another.  On 
the  other  hand,  in  some  of  the  States  the  county  is  taken  as  the  basis  of  apportion- 
ment for  members  of  one  or  both  of  the  Houses,  —  each  county  being  entitled  to  a 
certain  number  of  senators  or  representatives  as  the  case  may  be.  In  Illinois, 
which  has  the  simplest  system,  the  State  is  divided  into  fifty-three  districts,  each  of 
which  sends  one  senator  and  three  representatives  to  the  legislature. 

w  In  Massachusetts  many  districts  elect  two  and  some  three  representatives. 

16  This  method  of  nominating  candidates  for  the  legislature  is  not  found  out- 
side of  New  England.    This  is  due  to  the  fact  that  the  Lower  House  of  most  State 
legislatures  is  a  comparatively  small  body,  and  consequently  the  assembly  districts 
are  too  large  for  the  party  voters  to  meet  in  a  single  caucus. 

17  The  same  is  true  in  the  case  of  a  nomination  for  the  presidency  of  the  Senate 
where,  as  in  Massachusetts,  the  presiding  officer  of  the  upper  branch  is  elected  by 
the  members  and  has  the  appointment  of  committees. 


SECT.  8.]        OFFICERS  ELECTED  BY  LEGISLATURE.  73 

occurs,  the  friends  of  each  of  the  aspirants  for  the  coveted 
nomination  make  a  systematic  canvass  of  the  various  members 
elect,  and  endeavor,  by  means  of  circulars,  newspaper  edito- 
rials and  personal  solicitation,  to  influence  those  members  who 
are  as  yet  undecided.  If,  before  the  caucus  assembles,  it  is 
clearly  seen  that  one  candidate  will  have  an  undoubted  majority 
of  the  members-elect,  the  other  candidates  often  withdraw 
their  names. 

A  caucus  for  the  nomination  of  candidates  for  speaker  or  the 
other  legislative  officers  is  called  by  those  members  who  have 
some  reason  to  favor  a  caucus  nomination,18  and  is  called  to 
order  by  a  member  agreed  upon  by  those  issuing  the  call. 
The  member-elect  who  has  seen  the  earliest  service  in  the 
Senate  or  House  is  usually  chosen  to  preside,  while  one  of 
the  younger  members  is  generally  chosen  as  secretary.  Can- 
didates are  then  put  in  nomination  for  the  various  offices, 
and,  in  case  of  a  contest,  a  ballot  is  taken,  a  majority  of  the 
members  present  being  usually  necessary  for  a  choice.  Where 
only  one  candidate  is  proposed,  as  in  the  case  of  a  primary 
caucus,  the  nomination  is  made  by  acclamation.  After  the 
various  candidates  have  been  nominated,  and  a  caucus  com- 
mittee has  been  appointed  to  look  after  the  interests  of  the 
party  on  the  floor  of  the  chamber,  the  caucus  adjourns.  Like 
the  congressional  caucus,  these  legislative  caucuses,  as  occa- 
sion requires,  are  again  called  together  to  determine  the 
attitude  of  the  party  on  important  public  questions. 

18  A  copy  of  the  call  for  the  Massachusetts  Republican  House  Caucus  of  1894 
will  be  found  in  Appendix  D. 


CHAPTER   IV. 

NOMINATIONS   FOR   NATIONAL  OFFICES. 

I.  Relative  Importance  of  National  Elections.  Of  the  vast  body 
of  national  office-holders,  —  estimated  at  over  one  hundred 
and  fifty  thousand,  —  less  than  five  hundred,  including  the 
members  of  Congress,  obtain  their  positions  by  any  process  of 
nomination  and  election.  The  officers  whose  mode  of  selec- 
tion comes  within  the  scope  of  this  discussion  fall  naturally  into 
four  groups:  (i)  the  President  and  Vice-President ;  (2)  mem- 
bers of  the  House  of  Representatives,  including  the  territorial 
delegates;  (3)  United  States  Senators;  and  (4)  the  various 
officers  of  the  Senate  and  House. 

The  interest  in  national  nominations  and  elections  is  far 
greater  than  that  manifested  in  nominations  and  elections  for 
State  or  local  offices,  and  this,  in  spite  of  the  fact  that  the 
latter  are  really  of  vastly  more  importance  to  the  individual 
voter  than  the  former.  The  all-important  matters  of  police 
protection,  the  preservation  of  the  public  health,  the  construc- 
tion and  repair  of  highways,  the  support  and  maintenance  of 
public  education,  the  laws  governing  inheritance,  marriage 
and  divorce,  retail  trade,  the  relations  between  landlord  and 
tenant,  factory  legislation,  in  short,  almost  all  the  phases  of 
governmental  activity  with  which  the  ordinary  man  comes  in 
contact  in  his  daily  life,  are  entirely  within  the  domain  of 
the  State  and  municipal  governments.  To  them,  particularly 
to  the  latter,  the  citizen  pays  the  larger  part  of  his  taxes,  and 
to  them,  in  return,  he  looks  for  the  uninterrupted  enjoyment 
of  life,  liberty,  and  the  pursuit  of  happiness.  But  in  spite 
of  the  fact  that  the  honest  and  efficient  administration  of  the 
local  government  is  therefore  of  such  supreme  importance, 


SECT.  2.]    THE  CALL  OF  NA  TIONAL  CONVENTIONS.  75 

the  average  American  citizen  continues  to  take  far  greater 
interest  in  national  politics,  where  his  influence  is  necessarily 
limited,  than  in  the  government  of  his  own  city,  where  his 
individual  vote  has  far  greater  weight,  and  where  the  result 
of  the  primaries  and  of  the  election  is  of  much  greater  conse- 
quence to  his  welfare.  The  unfortunate  results  of  this  lack 
of  interest  in  local  affairs,  and  of  the  subordination  of  local  to 
national  politics,  are  plainly  seen  in  the  terrible  condition  of 
things  which  has  existed  in  New  York,  Philadelphia,  Chicago, 
and  other  large  cities. 

As  a  result  of  this  deep  interest  in  national  politics,  the 
nominating  machinery  is  better  known  and  much  more  highly 
developed  than  in  the  case  of  State  and  local  nominations. 
In  the  following  sections  we  shall  consider  this  machinery 
as  it  exists  to-day,  in  the  order  suggested  at  the  beginning  of 
the  chapter. 

2.  The  Call  of  National  Conventions.  Nominations  for  the 
Presidency  and  Vice-Presidency  have  been  made  for  the  past 
sixty  years  by  national  conventions  held  by  the  different 
political  parties  in  the  spring  or  early  summer  of  the  year  in 
which  the  presidential  election  occurs. 

Each  political  party  which  is  national  in  its  character  has  a 
national  committee  consisting  of  one  member  from  each  State 
and  Territory.1  This  committee  has  general  supervision  of 
the  national  affairs  of  the  party,  its  principal  work  being  the 
management  of  the  presidential  campaign.  For  this  purpose 
large  sums  of  money  are  raised  by  subscription  in  various 
parts  of  the  country,  and  the  money  thus  raised  is  used  in 
printing  and  distributing  campaign  literature,  hiring  speakers, 
and  in  assisting  the  State  committees,  particularly  in  the 
doubtful  States,  to  carry  their  States  for  the  national  ticket. 
In  addition  to  this  campaign  work,  the  national  committee 
has  the  duty  of  calling  the  national  convention.  It  determines 
the  date  of  meeting,  and  what  is  perhaps  more  important,  the 
place  where  it  is  to  be  held.  Of  late  years  there  has  been  a 
keen  rivalry  among  the  large  cities  of  the  country,  each  con- 

1  The  officers  of  the  national  committee  consist  of  a  chairman,  secretary,  treas- 
urer, and  an  executive  committee. 


76          NOMINATIONS  FOR  NATIONAL  OFFICES.    [CHAP.  IV. 

tending  for  the  honor  of  having  the  convention  held  within  its 
limits.  There  is  sometimes  a  spirited  contest  on  the  question 
in  the  national  committee.  In  the  case  of  the  Democratic 
Convention  of  1892,  there  was  a  long  and  protracted  struggle 
between  the  champions  of  the  different  cities.  Finally,  on 
the  fifteenth  ballot,  Chicago  secured  the  coveted  prize, 
Milwaukee  being  second.2  The  Republican  national  com- 
mittee, in  November,  1891,  held  a  public  hearing  at  Washing- 
ton, on  the  question  where  the  Convention  of  1892  should  be 
held.  At  this  hearing,  the  claims  of  the  different  cities  were 
urged  by  their  respective  representatives.  The  claims  of 
Minneapolis  were  presented  by  a  delegation  of  one  hundred  of 
the  prominent  men  of  the  Northwest.  On  the  seventh  ballot 
their  efforts  proved  successful,  and  Minneapolis  was  chosen.3 

Besides  designating  the  time  and  place  of  the  convention, 
the  call  specifies  the  number  of  delegates  to  which  each  State 
is  entitled.  According  to  the  present  practice  of  the  Repub- 
lican and  Democratic  parties,  each  State  is  allowed  to  send 
twice  as  many  delegates  as  it  has  electoral  votes. 

3.  The  Choice  of  Delegates.  A  copy  of  the  official  call 4  is  sent 
to  the  State  committee  of  the  party  in  each  State ;  thereupon 
the  State  committee  proceeds  to  call  a  State  convention  for 
the  purpose  of  choosing  the  four  delegates  from  the  State  at 
large,  and  at  the  same  time  notifies  the  party  committees  in 
the  different  congressional  districts  of  the  State.6  These  in 
their  turn  proceed  to  call  congressional  district  conventions  to 
choose  the  two  delegates  from  each  congressional  district. 
The  delegates  to  both  the  State  and  district  conventions  are 
chosen  at  caucuses  or  primaries  in  the  different  cities  and 
towns.  At  the  same  time  with  the  delegates,  there  are  chosen 
an  equal  number  of  "alternates,"  whose  duty  it  is  to  take  the 
place  of  the  regular  delegates,  in  case  the  latter  are  pre- 

*  Official  Proceedings  of  the  Democratic  National  Convention  of  1892,  14-21. 

*  Proceedings  of  the   Tenth  Republican  National  Convention,  held  in  the  City  of 
Minneapolis,  <5rV.  (Minneapolis,  1892),  6. 

*  A  copy  of  the  calls  of  National  Conventions  in  1892  and  1896  will  be  found  in 
Appendix  C. 

*  In  each  congressional  district  there  is  usually  a  congressional  district  commit- 
tee consisting  of  one  or  more  members  from  each  city  and  town  in  the  district. 


SECT.  3.]  THE   CHOICE  OF  DELEGA  TES.  77 

vented  by  sickness,  or  otherwise,  from  attending  the  national 
convention. 

The  choice  of  the  four  delegates  at  large  from  each  State  by 
the  State  convention,  and  the  election  of  the  remainder  of  the 
delegation  by  district  conventions  is  the  usual  method,  but 
not  the  invariable  rule.  In  some  cases,  the  State  convention 
chooses  the  entire  delegation.  This  is  the  custom  in  the 
Democratic  party  in  New  York  and  in  several  other  States. 
It  was  also,  until  very  recently,  the  custom  in  the  Republican 
party  in  the  South.  At  the  Republican  National  Convention 
of  1892,  however,  the  following  rule  was  adopted: 

The  National  Committee  shall  issue  the  call  for  the  meeting  of  the 
national  convention  six  months  at  least  before  the  time  fixed  for  said 
meeting,  and  each  congressional  district  in  the  United  States  shall  elect 
its  delegates  to  the  national  convention  in  the  same  way  as  the  nomina- 
tion of  a  member  of  Congress  is  made  in  such  district.  ...  An  alternate 
delegate  for  each  delegate  to  the  national  convention  to  act  in  case  of 
absence  of  the  delegate  shall  be  elected  in  the  same  manner  and  at 
the  same  time  as  the  delegate  is  elected.  Delegates  at  large  for  each 
state  and  their  alternates  shall  be  elected  at  a  state  convention  in  their 
respective  states.6 

The  result  of  this  rule  will  be  that  hereafter  all  delegates  to 
Republican  national  conventions  will  be  chosen  in  the  uni- 
form way  already  described.  The  Democratic  party  has  as 
yet  adopted  no  uniform  system  in  regard  to  the  choice  of 
delegates. 

Except  where  a  party  has  practically  no  chance  of  winning 
the  election,  the  names  of  various  statesmen  of  prominence  are 
mentioned  in  connection  with  the  Presidency  long  before  the 
calling  of  the  convention.  Early  in  the  convention  year  the 
friends  of  the  leading  aspirants  proceed  to  organize  in  each 
State,  and  endeavor  in  every  way  to  get  as  many  State  and 
district  conventions  as  possible  to  instruct  the  delegates  to 
support  their  favorite's  candidacy  at  the  national  convention. 
The  newspapers  publish  the  comparative  standing  of  the  vari- 
ous candidates,  giving  the  returns  from  each  State  and  district 

6  Official  Proceedings  of  the  National  Republican  Convention  0/1892,  p.  30. 


;8          NOMINATIONS  FOR  NATIONAL  OFFICES.    [CHAP.  IV. 

convention,  as  they  come  in,  and  revising  their  estimates  from 
day  to  day  until  all  the  delegates  have  been  chosen.  This 
ante-convention  contest  is  frequently  very  exciting ;  but,  as  a 
rule,  it  is  impossible,  even  after  all  the  delegates  have  been 
elected,  to  tell  who  will  be  the  actual  nominee  of  the  conven- 
tion. Exceptions  to  this  rule  are  the  nominations  of  Grant 
in  1868,  Cleveland  in  1884,  and  McKinley  in  1896,  in  all 
of  which  cases  the  nomination  was  practically  settled  before 
the  convention  met.  The  same  is  usually  the  case  where  a 
President  in  office  is  seeking  a  re-nomination,  although  this 
exception  does  not  always  hold  good,  as  is  witnessed  by  the 
nomination  of  Mr.  Elaine  over  President  Arthur  in  1884. 

After  the  delegates  have  all  been  chosen,  the  contest  is 
transferred  from  the  States  to  the  convention  city,  which  now 
becomes  the  seat  of  war.  The  friends  of  each  of  the  leading 
candidates  are  early  in  the  field.  They  open  their  own  par- 
ticular headquarters  in  one  of  the  leading  hotels;  and  they 
endeavor,  by  means  of  meetings  of  delegates,  open-air  rallies 
and  processions,  to  arouse  all  the  enthusiasm  possible  in  the 
interest  of  their  favorite  candidate.  It  is  here  that  "deals" 
between  the  leaders  of  the  different  factions  are  consummated, 
votes  are  traded  for  promises  of  patronage  (sometimes,  it  is  to 
be  feared,  for  something  more  tangible),  and,  in  short,  all  the 
secret  "wire-pulling"  is  carried  on  which  frequently  has  such 
an  important  effect  upon  the  final  action  of  the  convention. 

The  National  Committee  also  have  their  headquarters,  and 
several  days  before  the  meeting  of  the  convention  they  have 
arranged  all  the  minor  details  of  organization,  fixed  upon  the 
temporary  and  permanent  chairman,  reached  a  decision  upon 
the  greater  part  of  the  contested  seats,  and  have  determined 
upon  the  main  features  of  the  party  platform,  their  decision  in 
the  two  latter  cases  being  subject,  of  course,  to  the  approval 
of  the  committees  on  credentials  and  resolutions,  which  are 
subsequently  elected  by  the  convention. 

4.  Organization  of  National  Conventions.  It  has  been  the 
custom  to  hold  the  national  conventions  of  the  two  great  par- 
ties in  large  auditoriums,  the  object  being  to  make  room  for 
as  large  a  number  of  spectators  as  possible.  In  1892,  the  local 


SECT. 4.]    ORGANIZATION  OF  NATIONAL  CONVENTIONS.  79 

committee  having  charge  of  the  arrangements  for  the  holding 
of  the  Democratic  convention  in  Chicago  arranged  for  the 
erection  of  a  special  building,  with  a  seating  capacity  of 
twenty  thousand.  In  fact,  the  desire  to  accommodate  the 
visiting  public  has  led  to  the  utter  ignoring  of  the  rights  of 
the  delegates,  as  well  as  the  purpose  of  the  convention,  the 
size  of  the  convention  hall  rendering  it  entirely  unfit  for  the 
business  of  a  deliberative  body.  Moreover,  the  presence  of  a 
large  number  of  the  residents  of  the  State  in  which  the  con- 
vention is  held,  has  more  than  once  influenced  the  action  of 
the  convention,  notably  in  the  Republican  conventions  of  1860 
and  1884.  In  view  of  the  inconveniences  usually  resulting 
from  the  presence  of  such  a  multitude,  it  is  probable  that 
before  long  the  national  conventions  will  place  some  limita- 
tion on  the  number  of  spectators  at  their  meetings. 

Reference  has  been  made  to  the  local  committee  of  arrange- 
ments. This  committee  is  a  citizens'  body,  organized  by 
prominent  members  of  the  rank  and  file  of  the  party  in  the 
convention  city,  and  its  task  is  no  small  one.  At  the  Repub- 
lican Convention  of  1892,  the  arrangements  were  in  the  hands 
of  a  Citizens'  Executive  Committee,  with  sub-Committees  on 
Finance,  Hotels,  Transportation,  Music,  Decorations,  Tele- 
graph, State  Headquarters,  Press,  Building  and  Hall,  Audit- 
ing, Accommodations,  Reception,  Entertainment,  and  also  a 
Ladies'  Reception  Committee.7 

The  convention  is  called  to  order  usually  about  noon  of  the 
day  appointed  in  the  call,  by  the  chairman  of  the  national 
committee.  After  the  reading  of  the  official  call,  it  is  cus- 
tomary for  the  proceedings  to  be  opened  with  prayer  by  some 
clergyman  of  the  city.  The  national  committee,  either  through 
its  chairman  or  secretary,  then  reports  a  list  of  the  temporary 
officers  of  the  convention,  consisting  of  a  temporary  chairman, 
one  or  two  secretaries,  and  several  assistant  secretaries  and 
reading  clerks,  together  with  a  sergeant-at-arms,  and  one  or 
more  official  stenographers.8 

7  Official  Proceedings  of  Republican  National  Convention  of  1892,  pp.  6,  7. 

8  The  preliminary  arrangements  for  the  convention  are  delegated  by  the  na- 
tional committee  to  its  executive  committee,  and  by  this  usually  to  a  sub-committee. 


80         NOMINATIONS  FOR  NATIONAL  OFFICES.    [CHAP.  IV. 

This  list  being  adopted  by  the  convention,  as  a  matter  of 
course,  the  chairman  of  the  national  committee  yields  his 
place  to  the  temporary  chairman,  who,  on  taking  the  chair, 
makes  a  short  speech.  A  resolution  is  then  usually  adopted 
that  the  convention  be  governed  by  the  rules  of  the  preceding 
convention  "until  otherwise  ordered."  At  the  same  time  a 
motion  is  made  and  carried  for  the  appointment  of  a  Commit- 
tee on  Credentials,  a  Committee  on  Permanent  Organization, 
a  Committee  on  Rules,  and  a  Committee  on  Resolutions,  each 
consisting  of  one  member  from  each  State  and  Territory.  The 
usual  method  of  appointment  is  by  calling  the  roll  of  the  States 
and  Territories;  each  delegation  being  allowed  to  designate, 
through  its  chairman,9  a  member  for  each  of  these  four  com- 
mittees.10 At  this  point,  resolutions  relating  to  contested 
seats  are  usually  presented,  and  are  always  referred,  without 
debate,  to  the  Committee  on  Credentials. 

The  appointment  of  the  various  committees  ends  the  real 
work  of  the  first  day.  The  remainder  of  the  session  is  con- 
sumed in  deciding  in  regard  to  the  admission  of  spectators,  in 
passing  resolutions  of  sympathy  for  distinguished  men  who 
happen  to  be  afflicted,11  and  in  dealing  with  other  compara- 
tively unimportant  matters.13 

Inasmuch  as  no  regular  business  can  be  transacted  until  the 
Committee  on  Credentials  has  made  its  report,  if  that  Com- 
mittee is  not  yet  ready  when  the  convention  assembles  on  the 
morning  of  the  second  day,  the  convention  either  adjourns 

The  latter  arranges  the  list  of  temporary  and  permanent  officers  of  the  convention, 
and  attends  to  other  details  of  arrangement.     See  Ibid.,  8. 

9  Each  State  delegation  chooses  its  own  chairman. 

10  In  State  Conventions  these  committees  are  usually  appointed  by  the  presid- 
ing officer  of  the  convention,  without  consulting  the  delegates  from  the  various 
counties  or  districts. 

11  For  instance,  at  the  Democratic  Convention  in  1892,  the  following  resolution 
was  adopted  on  the  receipt  on  the  news  of  the  death  of  Emmons  Blaine :  "  Resolved: 
That  this  convention  tender  its  profound  sympathy  to  that  distinguished  American, 
James  G.  Blaine,  in  the  heavy  affliction  which  has  befallen  him."     Official  Proceed- 
'"#*>  35-     At  the  Republican  Convention  of  the  same  year  a  delegate  from  Penn- 
sylvania was  given  permission  to  read  a  letter  relative  to  the  Titusville  disaster, 
appealing  for  aid  for  the  sufferers.     Official  Proceedings,  39. 

M  At  the  Democratic  Convention  of  1892,  an  invitation  to  visit  the  World's  Fair 
Grounds  was  received  and  accepted.  Official  Proceeding:,  36. 


SECT.  4.]  ORGANIZATION  OF  NATIONAL  CONVENTIONS.  8 1 

over  to  the  following  day,  or,  if  the  report  is  likely  to  come 
in  at  any  moment,  the  time  of  waiting  is  taken  up  with  the 
offering  of  various  resolutions  by  different  delegates,  which 
are  generally  referred,  without  debate,  to  the  Committee  on 
Resolutions,  and  in  listening  to  short  speeches  by  prominent 
party  leaders  who  may  happen  to  be  present.13 

The  usual  delay  in  the  report  of  the  Committee  on  Credentials 
is  due  to  the  large  number  of  contested  seats.  For  instance, 
at  the  Republican  convention  of  1892  there  were  twenty- 
four  separate  cases.  When  we  consider  that  several  months 
are  often  spent  by  congressional  committees  in  the  considera- 
tion of  contested  election  cases,  it  is  not  to  be  wondered  at 
that  the  committee  of  a  national  convention  intrusted  with  a 
similar  duty,  is  sometimes  several  days  in  arriving  at  a.con- 
clusion  in  regard  to  all  the  cases  before  it.  After  both  sides 
have  had  an  opportunity  to  present  their  claims,  the  committee 
decides  between  them.  The  "  regular  "  delegate  or  delegates, 
that  is,  those  indorsed  by  the  State  or  district  committee, 
usually  receive  the  seat,  especially  if  there  are  but  one  or  two 
contested  cases  from  a  State.  Where,  however,  there  are  two 
full  delegations  from  the  same  State,  and  the  contestants  on 
each  side  appear  to  have  a  strong  case,  it  is  usual,  for  the  sake 
of  harmony,  to  give  seats  to  both  sets,  each  delegate  being 
entitled  to  half  a  vote.14  Such  contests  are  often  exceedingly 
bitter,  because  the  two  delegations  support  rival  candidates 
for  the  Presidency,  and  consequently  the  report  of  the  Com- 
mittee on  Credentials  frequently  has  an  important  bearing  on 
the  subsequent  nominating  proceedings. 

The  report  of  the  Committee  on  Credentials,  which  consists 

18  Sometimes,  while  the  convention  is  waiting  for  the  Committee  on  Credentials 
to  report,  the  reports  of  the  Committees  on  Permanent  Organization  and  Rules  are 
allowed  to  come  in  under  suspension  of  the  rules.  This  was  the  case  in  the 
Republican  Convention  of  1892,  the  speech  of  the  permanent  chairman,  Governor 
McKinley,  being  delivered  before  the  report  of  the  Committee  on  Credentials 
was  received. 

14  For  instance,  this  method  was  recommended  in  the  case  of  the  Utah  delega- 
tion at  the  Republican  Convention  of  1892.  A  similar  mode  of  settlement  was 
also  adopted  in  the  case  of  three  contesting  delegates  from  the  7th  North  Caro- 
lina district,  each  of  the  contestants  being  given  a  seat  and  two-thirds  of  a  vote. 
Official  Proceedings,  45. 

6 


82         NOMINATIONS  FOR  NATIONAL  OFFICES.    [CHAP.  IV. 

of  a  decision  in  regard  to  all  contested  seats,  together  with  an 
official  list  of  all  the  delegates  entitled  to  seats  in  the  conven- 
tion, arranged  by  States,  is  usually  accepted  by  the  convention 
without  much  debate.  Occasionally,  however,  especially  in 
recent  Republican  conventions,16  the  committee's  report  gives 
rise  to  a  hot  discussion,  and  not  infrequently  the  recommenda- 
tions of  a  majority  of  the  committee  are  rejected.  Perhaps  the 
most  exciting  contest  of  this  kind  occurred  at  the  Republican 
Convention  of  1880;  the  discussion  of  contested  seats  takes 
up  over  one  hundred  pages  of  the  published  proceedings.16  In 
order,  if  possible,  to  prevent  a  repetition  of  such  a  state  of 
affairs,  Mr.  Boutwell,  of  Massachusetts,  introduced  a  resolu- 
tion, which  was  adopted,  that  the  national  committee  recom- 
mend some  uniform  rule  for  the  election  of  delegates.17  An 
effective  rule  in  this  regard,  however,  was  not  finally  adopted 
until  the  Convention  of  i892.18  It  is  to  be  hoped  that  the 
enforcement  of  this  rule  will,  in  the  future,  relieve  Republican 
conventions  of  the  long  and  tiresome  discussions  which  have 
consumed  so  much  of  their  time  in  the  past. 

After  the  report  of  the  Committee  on  Credentials  has  been 
finally  disposed  of,  the  next  business  in  order  is  the  report  of 
the  Committee  on  Permanent  Organization,  which  consists  of 
a  long  list  of  the  permanent  officers  of  the  convention,19  pre- 
viously arranged  to  a  greater  or  less  extent  by  the  national 
committee.  This  report  is  unanimously  adopted  as  a  matter 
of  course,  and  a  committee  is  appointed  to  escort  the  perma- 
nent chairman  to  the  platform. 

u  The  large  number  of  contested  seats  from  the  Southern  States  is  due  to  the 
disorganized  condition  of  the  party  in  that  section  of  the  country. 

16  Proceedings  of  the  Republican  National  Convention  held  at  Chicago  (Chicago, 
1880),  45-150. 

17  Official  Proceedings  of  the  Republican  Convention  of  1880,  126. 

18  See  ante,  §  3  of  this  chapter. 

19  At  the  Democratic  Convention  of  1892,  the  list  included  a  president,  a  secre- 
tary, and  nine  assistant  secretaries,  a  chief  recording-secretary  and  eight  assistant 
recording-secretaries,   a  sergeant-at-arms,   a  chief  assistant  sergeant-at-arms,   and 
twenty  assistant  sergcants-at-arms,  and  an  official  stenographer.     In  addition,  there 
was  a  list  of  honorary  vice-presidents  and  honorary  secretaries,  consisting  of  one 
delegate  from  each  State  and  Territory,  nominated  by  their  respective  delegations. 
Official  Proceedings,  59-62. 


SECT. 4.]  ORGANIZATION  OF  NATIONAL  CONVENTIONS.  83 

The  permanent  chairman,  or  president,  as  he  is  usually 
called,  on  taking  the  chair,  proceeds  to  deliver  a  carefully 
prepared  speech  upon  the  issues  of  the  campaign.  Then 
comes  the  report  of  the  Committee  on  Rules,  which  consists 
of  an  order  of  business  for  the  convention  to  follow,  together 
with  the  rules  of  the  preceding  convention,  amended  in  such 
ways  as  the  committee  may  choose  to  suggest.  In  the  case  of 
Republican  conventions,  very  important  changes  are  frequently 
made  in  the  rules  from  convention  to  convention.  On  the 
other  hand,  Democratic  conventions  are  traditionally  conserva- 
tive, the  same  rules  being  always  adopted  with  practically 
no  change.20  This  accounts  for  the  permanence  of  the  famous 
two-thirds  rule,  to  which  reference  will  be  made  in  a  later 
chapter.21 

While  waiting  for  the  report  of  the  Committee  on  Resolu- 
tions, in  case  of  delay,  the  convention  occupies  itself  with 
miscellaneous  business,  such  as  the  election  of  a  national 
committee,  and  of  a  committee  to  notify  the  nominees  of  the 
convention.  Both  of  these  committees  are  usually  composed 
of  one  member  from  each  State  and  Territory,  the  members 
being  designated  by  their  respective  delegations. 

The  reading  of  the  "  Platform  "  is  one  of  the  most  interest- 
ing features  of  a  national  as  well  as  of  a  State  convention. 
The  resolutions  are  read  by  the  chairman  of  the  committee, 
who  is  generally  one  of  the  leading  men  of  the  party,  and  the 
reading  is  frequently  interrupted  by  applause.  The  resolu- 
tions are,  as  a  rule,  unanimously  adopted  as  read,  but  occa- 
sionally this  unanimity  is  rudely  broken,  as  in  the  case  of 
the  Democratic  Convention  of  1892,  at  which  the  tariff  plank 
was  the  subject  of  a  long  debate,  finally  resulting  in  the 
adoption  of  a  declaration  favoring  a  "tariff  for  revenue  only  " 
instead  of  the  "moderate  protection  "  resolution  recommended 
by  the  committee.22  The  platform  is  sometimes  intended  to 

20  The   rules  adopted  by  the   National  Conventions   of  the   Democratic  and 
Republican  parties  in  1892  and  1896  will  be  found  in  Appendix  C. 

21  See  post,  chapter  vi.  §  6. 

52  Official  Proceedings  of  the  Democratic  Convention  of  1892,  p.  92.  At  the  Repub- 
lican Convention  of  1896,  upon  the  refusal  of  the  convention  to  amend  the 
financial  part  of  the  platform  as  reported  by  the  committee,  by  the  substitution 


84         NOMINA  TIONS  FOR  NA  TTONAL  OFFICES.    [CHAP.  IV. 

reflect  the  views  of  some  chief  aspirant  for  the  nomination,  as 
in  the  case  of  the  Democratic  Convention  of  1888. 

5.  Nominating  Proceedings  in  National  Convention!.  After  the 
adoption  of  the  platform  comes  the  call  of  the  roll  of  States 
arranged  alphabetically,  for  the  presentation  of  candidates  for 
the  presidential  nomination.  If  a  State  has  a  "favorite  son," 
however  slight  his  chance  of  securing  the  nomination,  his 
name  is  often  put  before  the  convention.  This  custom  makes 
it  possible  for  a  State  delegation  to  pay  a  compliment  to  some 
prominent  party  leader,  and  at  the  same  time  affords  some  of 
the  delegates  an  opportunity  to  display  their  oratorical  powers. 
The  delegation  from  any  State  may,  when  called  in  its  turn, 
pass  its  right  to  any  other  delegation  not  yet  called.  For 
instance,  in  the  Democratic  Convention  of  1892,  Arkansas 
yielded  her  place  to  New  Jersey,  whereupon  Governor  Leon 
Abbett  of  that  State  proceeded,  in  an  elaborate  speech,  to  put 
Mr.  Cleveland  in  nomination. 

After  the  names  of  the  principal  candidates  have  been  pre- 
sented by  delegates  from  the  States  of  their  birth  or  residence,28 
State  delegations  which  have  no  additional  candidates  of  their 
own  to  present,  sometimes  authorize  one  of  their  number  to 
second,  in  a  short  speech,  one  of  the  nominations  already  made. 

The  presentation  of  names  takes  a  long  time,  and  is  the 
occasion  of  calculated  and  long-continued  applause,  which  is 
supposed  to  indicate  the  popularity  of  the  candidates.  When 
it  is  finished,  the  convention  proceeds  to  the  first  ballot.  As 
the  name  of  each  State  is  called  by  the  secretary,  the  chairman 
of  the  delegation  rises  in  his  place  and  announces  the  vote  of 
his  State.24  Numerous  ballots  are  often  required  to  decide 

of  a  free  silver  plank,  a  number  of  the  delegates  from  the  silver  States,  after 
formally  announcing  their  secession  from  the  Republican  party,  withdrew  from 
the  convention,  amid  a  scene  of  great  excitement. 

n  This  custom  of  having  the  name  of  a  prominent  aspirant  for  the  nomination 
presented  by  the  State  of  his  birth  or  residence,  is  not  always  followed.  For  in- 
stance, at  the  Republican  Convention  of  1892,  although  President  Harrison  was  first 
placed  in  nomination  by  a  delegate  from  his  native  State,  Indiana,  the  name  of  Mr. 
Blaine  was  first  presented  to  the  convention  by  Senator  Walcott  of  Colorado. 

34  In  Democratic  conventions,  where  the  convention  of  a  State  has  instructed 
the  delegation  to  vote  as  a  "  unit,"  or  where  the  delegation  has  itself  voted  to  do 
so,  the  entire  number  of  votes  to  which  the  State  is  entitled  in  the  convention  are 


SECT.  5.]    PROCEEDINGS  IN  NATIONAL  CONVENTIONS.    85 

the  contest,25  and  where  several  strong  men  are  in  competi- 
tion for  the  nomination,  it  frequently  happens  that  a  "dark 
horse,"  that  is  to  say,  some  comparatively  obscure  man  accept- 
able to  all  factions,  finally  receives  the  nomination.  The 
most  noteworthy  cases  of  "dark  horses"  have  been  the  nomi- 
nations of  Polk  in  1844,  Taylor  in  1848,  Pierce  in  i852,26 
Hayes  in  1876,  Garfield  in  1880,  and  Harrison  in  1888. 
Although  it  has  thus  frequently  happened  that  a  candidate  has 
been  finally  nominated  whose  nomination  was  not  expected, 
or  even  dreamed  of,  when  the  convention  assembled,  neverthe- 
less it  sometimes  happens  that  one  of  the  prominent  party 
leaders,  whose  name  has  been  mentioned  in  connection  with 
the  Presidency  long  before  the  calling  of  the  convention, 
secures  the  coveted  prize  without  much  of  a  contest  in  the 
convention.  Examples  of  this  are  the  nomination  of  Grant 
on  the  first  ballot,  in  1868,  and  of  Cleveland  and  Elaine,  in 
1884,  on  the  second  and  fourth  ballots,  respectively.  Experi- 
ence, however,  has  clearly  demonstrated  that,  unless  a  promi- 
nent party  leader  receives  a  majority  of  the  votes  on  one  of 
the  earlier  ballots,  he  is  practically  certain  to  lose  the  nomi- 
nation. According  to  the  rules  which  have  governed  Demo- 
cratic conventions  from  the  very  adoption  of  the  convention 
system,  a  candidate,  in  order  to  be  nominated,  must  receive  a 
two-thirds  vote  of  all  the  delegates  present;27  it  is  therefore 
often  difficult  to  nominate  the  most  prominent  man  in  the 
party,  even  though  his  selection  is  desired  by  a  decided 

cast  by  the  chairman  for  one  candidate.  Otherwise  the  chairman  announces  the 
number  of  votes  cast  for  each  candidate  in  the  poll  of  the  delegation.  In  Repub- 
lican conventions  the  unit  rule  has  not  prevailed  since  1880,  the  chairman  in  all 
cases  simply  announcing  the  actual  vote  of  the  delegation.  In  case  any  member  of 
the  delegation  doubts  the  vote  as  returned  by  the  chairman,  the  roll  of  the  delega- 
tion is  called  by  the  secretary  of  the  Convention. 

26  At  the  Democratic  Convention  of  1852,  it  took  forty-nine  ballots  to  nominate 
a  candidate  for  President;  and  at  the  Whig  Convention  of  the  same  year,  fifty-three 
ballots  were  taken  before  a  nomination  was  made. 

38  On  the  first  thirty-four  ballots  the  name  of  Franklin  Pierce  does  not  appear  at 
all.  On  the  thirty-fifth,  Virginia  cast  fifteen  votes  for  Pierce,  and  on  the  forty-ninth 
ballot  there  was  a  "stampede"  to  him,  and  he  was  nominated. 

27  For  a  history  of  the  "two-thirds  rule,"  see  ante,  chapter  i.  §  20.     See  also 
post,  chapter  vi.  §  6. 


86         NOM1NA  T1ONS  FOR  NA  TIONAL  OFFICES.    [CHAP.  IV. 

majority  of  the  Democratic  voters  as  well  as  of  the  delegates.28 
In  Republican  conventions  a  majority  of  the  delegates  present 
has  always  been  sufficient  for  a  nomination. 

As  soon  as  any  candidate  has  received  the  number  of  votes 
necessary  to  a  choice,  it  is  the  custom  for  the  principal  sup- 
porter of  the  next  highest  candidate  to  move  that  the  nomina- 
tion be  made  unanimous.  This  motion  is  seconded  by  the 
leading  supporters  of  the  other  unsuccessful  candidates,  and 
is  carried  amid  the  wildest  enthusiasm.39  After  the  pande- 
monium, which  sometimes  lasts  for  more  than  half  an  hour,  has 
subsided,  the  convention  proceeds,  in  precisely  the  same  man- 
ner, to  the  nomination  of  a  candidate  for  Vice-President.  This 
nomination  has  frequently  gone  begging,  and  never  receives 
the  patient  attention  of  the  convention  which,  in  the  light  of 
history,  its  importance  deserves.  It  is  common  to  choose  some 
man  who  represents  a  different  wing  of  the  party  from  the 
candidate  for  President,  or  who  can  influence  the  vote  of  a 
doubtful  State.  Examples  of  this  were  seen  in  the  nomina- 
tion of  Tyler  by  the  Whigs  in  1840,  and  of  Andrew  Johnson 
by  the  Republicans  in  1864,  both  of  which  proved  most  un- 
fortunate in  their  consequences. 

In  the  case  of  both  the  President  and  Vice-President  there 
is  the  chance  of  a  "stampede"  of  State  delegations  to  a  win- 
ning candidate  after  the  close  of  the  roll-call,  and  just  before 
the  announcement  of  the  vote.  This  was  well  illustrated  at 
the  Democratic  Convention  of  1892,  by  the  nomination  of  Mr. 
Stevenson  for  Vice-President.  What  took  place  can  perhaps 
be  best  described  by  a  quotation  from  the  stenographic  report 
of  the  proceedings  of  the  convention : 

As  the  last  state  was  called,  and  it  was  seen  that  Adlai  E.  Stevenson 
was  leading  all  the  candidates,  the  chairman  of  the  Iowa  delegation  arose 
and  stated  that  he  desired  to  change  the  vote  of  Iowa  from  Watterson  to 

28  The  two  most  notable  cases  are  Martin  Van  Buren  in  1844,  and  Stephen  A. 
Douglass  in  1860. 

29  According  to  the  existing  rules  in  Republican  conventions,  immediately  upon 
the  announcement  by  the  secretary  that  a  certain  candidate  has  received  the  nomi- 
nation, the  chair,  without  waiting  for  any  motion,  puts  the  question,  "  Shall  his 
nomination  be  made  unanimous?"     See  Official  Proceedings  of  the  Minneapolis  Con- 
vention ^1892,  p.  141. 


SECT.  6.]    NOMINATION  OF  PRESIDENTIAL  ELECTORS.     8/ 

Stevenson.  This  was  the  signal  for  a  general  stampede  to  Stevenson, 
and  chairmen  of  delegations  in  all  parts  of  the  hall  were  seen  standing 
on  chairs  endeavoring  to  catch  the  eye  of  the  presiding  officer.  As  dele- 
gation after  delegation  followed  the  lead  of  Iowa,  and  it  became  evident 
that  Mr.  Stevenson  was  to  be  nominated,  Mr.  Cole  of  Ohio  was  recog- 
nized by  the  chair,  and  moved  that  the  rules  be  suspended  and  that 
General  Stevenson  be  nominated  by  acclamation.  The  motion  was 
seconded  by  W.  U.  Hensel  of  Pennsylvania.  .  .  .  On  being  put,  the 
motion  was  unanimously  adopted  and  General  Adlai  E.  Stevenson  was 
declared  the  nominee  of  the  Democratic  party  for  the  office  of  Vice- 
President  of  the  United  States.30 

After  the  nominations  have  been  made,  motions  are  usually 
carried,  empowering  the  national  committee  to  fix  the  time 
and  place  of  the  next  national  convention,  and  to  perform  other 
services,  in  case  provision  for  such  matters  has  not  already 
been  made  in  the  rules.  Then,  after  passing  resolutions  for 
the  printing  of  the  proceedings  of  the  convention,  thanking 
the  citizens  of  the  place  where  the  convention  has  been  held 
for  their  hospitality,  and  also  thanking  the  different  officers 
of  the  convention  for  their  services,  the  national  convention  — 
the  great  instrument  by  which  the  American  people  arrive  at 
a  choice  of  party  candidates  for  the  highest  office  in  their 
gift  —  adjourns  sine  die.zl 

6.  Nomination  of  Presidential  Electors.  Some  account  of  the 
method  of  nominating  electors  in  the  several  States  seems  to 
be  called  for  at  this  point.  Candidates  for  the  two  electors  at 

80  Official  Proceedings  of  the  Democratic  Convention  ofiSgz,  174-5. 

81  As  has  already  been  mentioned,  it  is  the  custom  of  national  conventions, 
either  before  or  after  the  making  of  the  nominations,  to  appoint  a  committee  or 
committees  to  notify  the  candidates  of  the  action  of  the  convention.     Such  a  com- 
mittee always  consists  of  one  delegate  from  each  State  and  Territory,  and,  as  in  the 
case  of  other  committees,  each  delegation  selects  its  own  representative.    The  noti- 
fication proceedings  are  usually  very  simple.     The  committee  visits  the  candidate 
at  his  home,  and  the  chairman,  in  a  brief  speech,  formally  notifies  him  of  his  nomi- 
nation.    The  candidate  replies  informally,  accepting  the  honor  conferred  upon  him : 
this  is  followed  later  by  a  carefully  prepared  letter  of  acceptance,  which  is  published 
and  spread  broad-cast  over  the  country  as  a  campaign  document.     Sometimes, 
however,  as  in  the  case  of  the  Democratic  Convention  of  1892,  the  notification  pro- 
ceedings are  more  elaborate.     See  Official  Proceedings  of  the  Democratic  National 
Convention  0/1892,  214. 


88          NOMINATIONS  FOR  NATIONAL  OFFICES.    [CHAP.  IV. 

large  to  which  each  State  is  entitled  are,  in  every  case,  nomi- 
nated at  the  regular  State  convention  held  for  the  nomination 
of  State  officers,  or,  in  case  there  are  no  State  officers  to  be 
nominated,  by  a  State  convention  called  for  that  express  pur- 
pose. The  candidate  for  elector  in  each  congressional  district 
is  usually  nominated  by  the  district  convention  held  for  the 
purpose  of  nominating  a  candidate  for  the  Lower  House  of  Con- 
gress. In  some  States,  however,  a  complete  electoral  ticket 
for  the  whole  State  is  nominated  by  the  State  convention. 

It  is  common  to  put  upon  the  electoral  ticket,  particularly 
in  the  case  of  the  electors  at  large,  distinguished  members  of 
the  party  who  have  never  held  national  office,  or  who  have 
retired  therefrom. 

Vacancies  arising  in  the  electoral  ticket  before  the  election 
are  usually  filled  either  by  the  other  nominees  or  by  the  State 
committee. 

7.  Nominations  for  the  National  House  of  Representatives.  The 
nomination  of  a  candidate  for  representative  in  Congress  for 
any  given  district  is,  in  most  sections  of  the  country,  made 
by  a  congressional  district  convention82  composed  of  delegates 
chosen  at  caucuses  or  primaries  in  the  various  towns  and  city 
wards  of  the  district.  The  call  for  the  convention  is  issued  by 
the  congressional  district  committee,  and  states  the  number 
of  delegates  to  which  each  city  and  town  is  entitled.33 

The  convention  is  called  to  order  by  the  chairman  of  the 
district  committee,  and  the  mode  of  procedure  is  practically 
the  same  as  that  of  the  county  convention  described  in  chap- 
ter ii.  The  nomination  of  a  congressional  candidate  is  often 
determined  in  advance  by  a  private  agreement  that  the  incum- 
bent, after  one  or  more  terms  of  service,  shall  retire  and  aid 
the  nomination  of  his  principal  rival  in  a  former  convention. 
Moreover,  as  in  the  case  of  other  district  conventions,  it  is 

u  During  the  first  half  of  the  century  it  frequently  happened  that  the  State  con- 
vention of  a  party  nominated  the  party  candidates  for  all  the  congressional  districts 
of  the  State.  At  the  present  time,  in  some  sections  congressional  candidates  are 
nominated  by  the  "  Crawford  County  "  system  already  referred  to. 

83  As  has  been  mentioned  before,  in  Massachusetts  the  State  committee  each 
year  determines  upon  a  uniform  basis  of  representation  for  the  State  convention  as 
well  as  for  all  district  conventions. 


SECT.  8.]       CANDIDATES  FOR  THE  U.S.  SENATE.  89 

customary  for  the  different  portions  of  the  district  to  furnish 
the  candidate  in  turn. 

As  in  the  case  of  a  State  convention,  after  a  candidate  has 
been  nominated,  a  committee  is  usually  appointed  —  consist- 
ing, in  case  of  a  contest,  of  a  representative  of  each  of  the 
rival  candidates  —  to  find  the  nominee  and  escort  him  to  the 
hall.  In  case  the  search  of  the  committee  proves  successful, 
the  newly-nominated  candidate  treats  the  convention  to  a 
speech,  usually  carefully  prepared  beforehand,  in  which  he 
tells  the  assembled  delegates  what  he  intends  to  do  if  elected. 
Then,  after  the  choice  of  a  new  district  committee,34  the 
convention  adjourns. 

In  those  years  in  which  a  Presidential  election  occurs,  the 
congressional  convention  also  names  a  candidate  for  Presi- 
dential elector  to  be  placed  upon  the  State  electoral  ticket  at 
the  coming  election. 

8.  Nomination  of  Candidates  for  the  United  States  Senate.  In 
a  few  cases  candidates  for  the  United  States  Senate  have  been 
nominated  by  the  State  conventions  called  for  the  purpose  of 
nominating  candidates  for  State  offices,  and  the  candidates 
thus  nominated  have  "  stumped  "  the  State,  —  the  election  of 
members  of  the  legislature  turning  upon  the  senatorial  ques- 
tion. Examples  of  such  cases  are  to  be  found  in  the  memora- 
ble Lincoln-Douglas  contest  in  Illinois,  in  1858,  and  more 
recently  in  the  election  of  General  Palmer  over  Senator 
Farwell  in  the  same  State,  in  1891,  and  of  Senator  Cullom 
over  Mr.  McVeagh  in  1893. 

As  a  rule,  however,  the  nomination  of  a  candidate  for  the 
United  States  Senate  is  made  at  a  joint  caucus  of  the  party 
members  of  both  Houses  of  the  State  legislature,  the  members 
of  those  bodies  being  generally  chosen  with  very  little  refer- 
ence to  their  preference  for  senator.  The  call  for  such  a 
caucus  is  issued  either  by  the  caucus  committees  of  the  two 
Houses,35  or  by  those  members  of  the  party  who,  for  one  rea- 

34  District  committees  are  usually  chosen  to  serve  from  the  first  day  of  the  Janu- 
ary following  the  holding  of  the  convention.  Thus  the  old  committee  conducts  the 
campaign  for  the  newly  nominated  candidate. 

86  The  Senate  and  House  caucuses,  held  at  the  beginning  of  the  session  for  the 


90          NOMINATIONS  FOR  NATIONAL  OFFICES.    [CHAP.  IV. 

son  or  another,  are  favorable  to  a  caucus  nomination,88  and  if 
attended,  as  is  usually  the  case,  by  the  greater  part  of  the 
members  of  the  party  in  the  legislature,  its  action  is  considered 
as  binding  upon  all. 

The  caucus  is  called  to  order  either  by  the  oldest  member 
present,  or  by  some  member  named  in  the  call,  and  the  pro- 
cedure is  exactly  the  same  as  that  of  the  caucuses  of  the  two 
Houses  of  the  legislature  held  at  the  beginning  of  the  session 
for  the  purpose  of  nominating  candidates  for  the  various 
offices  of  their  respective  bodies.  The  only  difference  is  that 
the  caucus  for  nominating  a  candidate  for  senator  is  a  joint 
caucus  of  the  two  Houses.  It  is  customary  to  choose  a  mem- 
ber of  the  Upper  House  to  act  as  chairman,  and  a  member  of 
the  Lower  House  as  secretary. 

In  States  where  one  party  has  an  overwhelming  majority  in 
the  legislature,  as  is  the  case  generally  in  the  South,  as  well 
as  in  some  parts  of  the  North,  it  sometimes  happens  that  no 
previous  nomination  of  a  candidate  for  senator  is  made,  as 
there  is  no  possible  chance  of  a  member  of  the  opposite  party 
being  elected  by  any  combination  of  disaffected  members  with 
the  minority  in  open  legislature.  At  the  present  time,  how- 
ever, there  is  a  tendency  on  the  part  of  political  leaders  to 
compel  the  holding  of  a  caucus  under  all  circumstances,  for 
the  purpose  of  preserving  the  party  organization. 

9.  Nominations  for  the  Offices  of  the  Senate  and  House  of 
Representatives.  The  only  other  national  officers  of  a  directly 
or  indirectly  elective  character,  which  we  have  not  considered, 
are  the  officers  of  the  two  Houses  of  Congress.  The  officers 
elected  by  the  Senate  consist  of  a  President  pro  tent.,  a 
Secretary,  a  Chaplain,  a  Sergeant-at-arms,  and  a  Postmaster. 

purpose  of  nominating  candidates  for  President  and  Speaker  respectively,  choose 
caucus  committees  to  look  after  the  interests  of  the  party  on  the  floor  of  their 
respective  chambers.  See  ante,  chapter  iii.  §  8. 

*  It  sometimes  happens  that  the  friends  of  a  particular  candidate  prefer  not  to 
go  into  a  party  caucus  for  the  reason  that  if  the  election  were  left  to  the  open  legis- 
lature their  candidate  would  receive  the  support  of  members  of  the  opposite  party, 
which,  with  a  minority  of  his  own  party,  might  be  sufficient  to  secure  his  election ; 
while  if  they  went  into  a  caucus  the  candidate  of  the  other  faction  would  be  nomi- 
nated, and  they  would  be  bound  to  vote  for  the  caucus  nominee. 


SECT.  9.]     OFFICERS  OF  THE  SENATE  AND  HOUSE.  9I 

The  officers  elected  by  the  House  of  Representatives  consist 
of  a  Speaker,  a  Clerk,  a  Chaplain,  a  Sergeant-at-arms,  a  Door- 
keeper, and  a  Postmaster.37  Of  these  only  the  President  pro 
tern,  of  the  Senate,  and  the  Speaker  of  the  House,  are 
members  of  their  respective  bodies.38 

Candidates  for  all  the  offices  just  mentioned  are  nominated 
at  a  caucus  of  the  party  members  of  the  Senate  or  House,  as 
the  case  may  be.  The  call  for  such  a  caucus  is  usually  signed 
by  the  chairman  of  the  last  caucus,  if  he  is  still  a  member, 
otherwise  by  some  prominent  party  leader,  or  by  a  self- 
appointed  committee.  The  procedure  is  exactly  the  same  as 
that  of  the  caucuses  held  by  the  party  members  of  the  two 
Houses  of  a  State  legislature  held  for  a  similar  purpose,  which 
has  already  been  described.39 

As  long  as  one  party  continues  to  be  in  a  majority  in  one  of 
the  Houses,  there  is  usually  no  contest  for  the  nominations, 
the  old  officials  being  re-nominated  by  acclamation.  When, 
however,  there  has  been  a  change  in  the  political  complexion 
of  either  House,  the  struggle  for  the  different  offices  is  very 
keen.  This  is  especially  true  in  regard  to  the  office  of  Speaker 
of  the  House,  owing  to  the  fact  that  the  incumbent  of  that 
office  is  in  some  respects  the  most  powerful  personage  in  the 
national  government.  The  canvass  begins  months  before  the 
assembling  of  Congress;  and  during  the  days  immediately 
preceding  the  decisive  first  Monday  in  December,  the  button- 
holing of  new  members,  and  the  bargaining  for  votes  in 
return  for  desirable  committee  places,  are  carried  on  with  great 
energy. 

The  contest  for  the  nomination  for  President  pro  tern,  of 
the  Senate,  affords  a  striking  contrast  to  the  bitter  struggle 
for  the  Speakership.  The  reason  is  of  course  to  be  found  in 
the  fact  that  the  former  is  merely  a  standing  substitute  for 
the  regular  presiding  officer,  and  that  the  committees  of  the 
Senate  are  elected  by  ballot  instead  of  being  appointed  by 

37  These  officers  appoint  their  subordinates. 

38  For  a  detailed  historical  account  of  the  election  of  the  Speaker,  see  Mary  P. 
Follett,  The  Speaker,  chapter  ii. 

89  See  ante,  chapter  iii.  §  8. 


92          NOMINATIONS  FOR  NATIONAL  OFFICES.    [CHAP.  IV. 

the  chair  as  is  done  in  the  House.40  Moreover,  the  presidency 
of  the  Senate  is  now  less  important  than  formerly :  previous 
to  1886,  the  incumbent  of  that  office  was  second  in  succession 
to  the  Presidency  of  the  United  States,  a  possibility  of  pro- 
motion which  he  no  longer  enjoys. 

40  The  make-up  of  the  majority  of  the  various  Senate  committees,  including  the 
naming  of  the  chairman/is  determined  by  the  regular  Senate  caucus  of  the  majority 
party.  The  membership  of  the  minority  of  the  committees  is  determined  in  like 
manner  by  a  caucus  of  the  minority  party.  The  nominees  of  the  two  caucuses  are 
then  elected  by  the  Senate,  as  a  matter  of  course. 


part  in. 

DEFECTS   OF  THE   PRESENT  SYSTEM. 


CHAPTER  V. 

ABUSES  OF  THE  CAUCUS  OR  PRIMARY. 

1.  Importance  of  the  Primaries.     In   the   preceding   chapters 
our  present  nominating  machinery  has  been  described  some- 
what in  detail.     We  have  seen  that,   although  at  first  sight 
rather  complex,  it  is,   in    reality,  simple;  and  that  it  is  the 
result  of  a  gradual  development  of  the  democratic  spirit  under 
a  system  of  Republican  government.     But  in  spite  of  its  sim- 
plicity and  natural  development,  it  must  be  admitted  that  it 
has  of  late  years  failed  to  give  perfect  satisfaction. 

A  careful  examination  of  the  matter  makes  it  plain  that  the 
evils  under  which  we  are  suffering  at  the  present  time  are 
not  due  to  the  nominating  machinery  itself,  but  rather  to  the 
selections  made  at  the  caucuses  and  primaries,  which,  as  we 
have  seen,  constitute  the  corner-stone  of  our  whole  nominat- 
ing system.  The  importance  of  these  primary  meetings  can- 
not be  over-estimated.  If  the  voters  who  attend  them  choose 
unfit  men  to  act  as  their  representatives  in  the  various  con- 
ventions, the  nominees  of  these  conventions  are  likely  to  prove 
unworthy  standard-bearers  of  the  party,  and,  as  a  result,  the 
government  will  be  badly  conducted.  This  has  been  the  case 
especially  in  our  large  cities,  where  bad  nominations  have 
been  largely  responsible  for  the  corrupt  and  inefficient  muni- 
cipal government  which  has  been  such  a  disgrace  to  the 
American  name. 

In  the  present  chapter  we  shall  study  the  actual  workings  of 
the  caucuses  and  primaries,  upon  the  proper  conduct  of  which 
the  cause  of  good  government  so  vitally  depends. 

2.  Primaries  in  Cities.     In  the  large  cities  the  strain  on  the 
primaries  is  especially  noticeable.     New  York,  Philadelphia, 


96  ABUSES  OF  THE  CAUCUS  OR  PRIMARY.    [CHAP.V. 

Baltimore,  and  Boston  have  been  selected  for  special  treatment 
here;  but  what  is  said  of  these  would  be  substantially  true 
of  Brooklyn,  Jersey  City,  Cincinnati,  Cleveland,  Chicago, 
Milwaukee,  St.  Louis,  San  Francisco,  —  in  short,  of  every 
large  city  as  well  as  of  many  of  the  smaller  cities  in  the 
United  States. 

In  the  rural  districts,  complaints  that  the  present  system 
fails  to  give  fair  expression  to  the  wishes  of  the  party  voters 
are  comparatively  few.  This  difference  is  due  to  four  princi- 
pal causes.  In  the  first  place,  in  the  country  towns  each  voter 
is  usually  acquainted  with  every  other  voter,  and  hence  such 
practices  as  "repeating"1  are  practically  impossible.  Again, 
as  a  result  of  the  comparatively  small  number  of  voters,  the 
disorder  incident  to  an  over-crowded  place  of  meeting  is 
avoided.  A  more  potent  cause  of  the  absence  of  the  disgrace- 
ful disturbances  which  have  characterized  the  city  primaries 
is  the  fact  that  in  the  country  the  turbulent  and  excitable  for- 
eign element  is  less  common.  The  people  are  mostly  native 
Americans,  deeply  anxious  for  good  government  and  quick  to 
resent  all  unfair  and  fraudulent  practices.  Finally,  the  town 
governments  have  little  to  bestow  in  the  way  of  lucrative  pub- 
lic offices.  It  is  in  the  cities  that  the  spoils  of  office  are 
mostly  to  be  found.  In  addition  to  the  important  national 
offices  in  every  large  city,  such  as  postmaster,  collector  of 
customs,  and  surveyor,  there  is  the  enormous  patronage  at 
the  disposal  of  those  in  control  of  the  city  government.  Hence, 
we  find  in  the  cities  a  class  of  professional  politicians,  with 
whom  the  management  of  caucuses  and  primaries  is  a  regular 
business.  Even  the  county  offices,  which  are  the  only  "  spoils  " 
in  any  way  affected  by  the  town  and  village  caucuses,  can  be 
more  effectively  controlled  by  the  politicians  by  devoting  their 
energies  to  the  choice  of  city  delegates.  For  these  reasons,  the 
professional  politician  has  a  less  favorable  field  in  the  country 
districts,  and,  as  a  consequence,  the  primary  meetings  are  more 
apt  to  represent  the  free  and  honest  sentiment  of  the  voters. 

3.  Early  Disorderly  Primaries.  A  very  common  error  is  to 
suppose  that  the  fraud  and  violence  which  at  present  exist  in 

1  I.  e.  Voting  several  times  under  false  names. 


SECT.  3-]  EARLY  DISORDERLY  PRIMARIES.  97 

the  party  primaries  in  our  large  cities  are  of  very  recent 
origin.  Political  reformers  are  constantly  referring  us  back 
to  the  pure  period  when  caucuses  managed  by  politicians  were 
unknown,  and  when  the  proceedings  of  the  primary  were  con- 
ducted in  a  staid  and  dignified  manner.  As  a  matter  of  fact, 
however,  violence  and  fraud,  as  well  as  machine-control,  are 
evils  that  have  existed  from  the  beginning.  A  few  examples 
of  primary  meetings  conducted  by  our  ancestors  may  not  be 
out  of  place. 

A  "Democratic-Republican"  caucus  held  in  1823,  in  one  of 
the  New  York  wards,  called  out  the  following  criticism  from 
Niles: 

The  meeting  was  held  on  Monday  evening  last.  We  know  not 
how  to  gather  the  truth  from  the  various  and  conflicting  accounts  before 
us,  nor  shall  we  attempt  to  blame  any  party ;  but  it  certainly  appears 
that  the  meeting  was  exceedingly  numerous  and  very  turbulent ;  and 
there  were  two  presidents  and  secretaries  put  up  and  sustained  by  the 
opposing  parties,  and  each  set  did  business  for  itself,  —  one  ratifying 
the  nomination  [i.  e.  of  the  executive  committee  of  Tammany  Hall], 
and  the  other  forming  a  new  ticket.2 

In  the  same  issue  of  the  Register  is  a  mention  of  a  "much- 
agitated  "  Democratic  meeting  at  Albany,  New  York.  A 
motion  appears  to  have  been  made  to  instruct  the  persons 
nominated  to  vote  for  a  law  by  which  Presidential  electors 
should  be  chosen  by  the  people  instead  of  by  the  legislature. 
A  motion  was  then  made  to  postpone  the  first  motion  in- 
definitely, and  the  chair  declared  the  latter  motion  carried, 
"although  the  majority  was  undoubtedly  in  favor  of  the  reso- 
lution and  against  postponement."3  One  of  the  ward  prima- 
ries in  New  York  city,  held  in  the  same  year,  was  "  exceedingly 
disorderly,"  and  "broke  up  in  confusion,  the  lamps  having 
been  broken,  and  the  lights  extinguished  to  defeat  the  will  of 
the  majority."  4  These  disorders  were  not  confined  to  any  one 

2  Nileis  Register,  XXV.  131. 

8  This  chairman  has  had  many  imitators  in  city  primaries. 

*  Nilef 's  Register,  XXV.  8l. 

7 


98  ABUSES  OF  THE  CAUCUS  OR  PRIMARY.    [CHAP.  V. 

State;  here  is  an  account  of  a  primary  held  in  Philadelphia, 
in  October,   1826: 

The  meeting  was  opened  in  the  Court  Room,  William  Jones,  Esq., 
in  the  chair.  Because  of  the  crowd,  it  was  proposed  to  adjourn  into 
the  State  House  yard.  A  division  was  attempted  to  be  made  on  this 
motion,  but  the  chairman  could  not  determine  whether  the  ayes  or  noes 
had  it.  Now  the  multitude  began  to  cry  aloud,  —  and  from  words 
many  proceeded  to  blows,  and  most  foul  and  provoking  language  was 
freely  used ;  the  president  was  hustled  out  of  his  chair,  and  the  chairs 
and  furniture  of  the  room  quickly  broken  into  pieces  or  materially 
injured.  A  new  chairman  when  about  to  take  his  seat,  was  not  a  little 
discomposed  on  being  made  a  floor  man  instead  of  a  chairman,  by  a 
sudden  withdrawing  of  the  seat  from  beneath  him.  The  "  Freeman's 
Journal "  says  that  a  Spanish  knife  was  drawn  but  the  use  of  it  was  pre- 
vented ;  and  the  "  Democratic  Press"  asserts  that  in  the  confusion  a 
gentleman  of  good  reputation  was  assaulted  by  half  a  dozen  of  his  own 
party  who,  among  other  things,  "ferociously  and  fiercely  bit  him"  with 
their  teeth  !  and  that  this  took  place  immediately  in  front  of  the  chair 
&c.  The  differences  arose  because  one  party  desired  the  nomination  of 
Mr.  Henry  Horn,  a  friend  of  Gen.  Jackson,  and  the  other  that  of  Mr. 
John  Sergeant,  a  friend  of  Mr.  Adams,  for  representative  to  congress. 
The  number  in  favor  of  the  former  appears  to  have  been  the  greatest, 
but  after  the  separation  of  the  parties  each  made  a  nomination  for 
itself  —  as  had  better  been  done  before  they  came  into  such  disgraceful 
contact  with  one  another.6 

Again,  the  "management"  of  caucuses  by  politicians,  in 
spite  of  the  lamentations  of  recent  writers,  is  a  thing  which 
has  also  existed  from  the  very  beginning.  Samuel  Adams 
was  an  expert  in  the  "  management "  of  caucuses.  According 
to  John  Adams,  Alexander  Hamilton  appears  to  have  been 
somewhat  familiar  with  the  art  of  political  management,6  while 
the  clever  manipulations  of  that  consummate  politician,  Aaron 
Burr,  are  but  too  well  known  to  every  student  of  American 
political  history.  Niles,  writing  in  1830,  speaks  in  scathing 
terms  of  the  "regencies  and  juntos,  — the  squads  of  contemp- 

•  AW«V  Register,  XXXI.  85. 

«  See  Works  of  John  Adams  (ed.  of  1850),  VI.  542-5. 


SECT.  4.]    NEW  DIFFICULTIES  IN  THE  PRIMARIES.  99 

tible  politicians  who  have  managed  the  nominating  meetings."  7 
About  the  same  time  the  editor  of  the  Philadelphia  Gazette, 
after  calling  attention  to  the  fact  that  elections  are  really 
decided  at  the  primaries  of  the  two  leading  parties,  declared 
that  "  all  the  science  and  skill  of  politicians  have  been  exerted 
in  the  election  of  delegates  to  the  party  conferences  and  in 
managing  them  in  their  convocations."8 

4.  New  Difficulties  in  the  Primaries.  No  pleasure  can  be 
drawn  from  knowing  that  our  ancestors  were  "  turbulent "  and 
sometimes  dishonest  in  their  caucuses  and  primaries ;  but  this 
fact  shows  that  the  difficulty  is  inherent,  and  not  the  result  of 
local  or  temporary  conditions.  Indeed,  considering  all  the 
circumstances,  there  would  seem  to  be  greater  self-restraint 
now  than  in  the  times  we  have  just  been  considering;  for 
to-day  we  have  two  factors  to  deal  with  which  did  not  then 
exist, — the  "spoils  system,"  in  the  government  service,  and 
the  concentration  in  our  large  cities  of  great  numbers  of  for- 
eigners. We  can  hardly  expect  greater  moderation  on  their 
part  than  was  shown  sixty  years  ago  by  the  sons  of  the  signers 
of  the  Declaration  of  Independence.  The  violence  and  fraud 
which  exist  in  the  party  primaries  in  our  large  cities  are  due 
to  the  character  of  the  voters  who  attend  them.  The  only 
effective  remedy  for  the  evil  is  the  raising  of  the  general 
level  of  intelligence  of  the  voters  themselves,  accompanied  by 
the  enforcement  of  statutes  severely  punishing  all  unlawful 
acts.  A  third  difficulty,  in  the  way  of  good  nominations,  has 
been  the  rapid  growth  of  a  class  of  politicians  who  make  the 
management  of  the  primaries  their  means  of  livelihood,  — 
a  state  of  affairs  made  possible  by  the  continued  existence  of 
the  spoils  system. 

These  three  difficulties  are  each  most  serious,  and  combined 
they  even  threaten  the  existence  of  republican  government. 
The  extension  of  civil  service  reform  will  tend  to  diminish  the 
prizes  obtainable  through  caucus  management;  as  time  goes 
on,  if  further  immigration  be  properly  restricted,  the  city 
populations  must  become  more  homogeneous  and  more  Ameri- 
can. The  political  manager  will  always  be  with  us ;  but  by 

1  Niles's  Register,  XXXVIII.  23!.  *  Ibid.,  XXXVI.  363. 


100  ABUSES  OF  THE  CAUCUS  OK  PRIMARY.    [CHAP.V. 

rigid  laws  he  may  be  restrained  from  overriding  the  wishes  of 
the  majority  of  the  caucus.  A  higher  view  of  the  public  ser- 
vice, and  of  the  qualifications  necessary  for  those  who  would 
take  part  in  it,  is  the  only  final  remedy. 

5.  The  Primary  in  New  York  City.  In  New  York  one  is 
struck  at  the  outset  by  the  complications  caused  by  the  large 
number  of  local  officers  to  be  elected.  To  make  matters 
worse,  up  to  1894  the  State  and  city  elections  were  held  on 
the  same  day.  The  city  officers  9  elected  by  the  people  are  a 
mayor,  comptroller,  president  of  the  board  of  aldermen,  one 
alderman  in  each  of  twenty-five  districts,  a  sheriff,  county 
clerk,  register,  four  coroners,  a  district-attorney,  six  justices 
of  the  Superior  Court,  six  justices  of  the  Court  of  Common 
Pleas,  six  justices  of  the  city  court,  one  district  court  civil 
justice  in  each  of  the  eleven  judicial  districts,  a  recorder,  two 
judges  of  general  sessions,  a  city  judge,  and  a  surrogate.  The 
voters  on  the  same  day,  in  1892,  voted  for  the  greater  part  of 
the  following  State  officers:  a  governor,  lieutenant-governor, 
secretary  of  State,  comptroller,  treasurer,  attorney-general, 
State  engineer  and  surveyor,  judges  of  the  Supreme  Court  and 
the  Court  of  Appeals,  together  with  twenty-four  assembly-men 
and  eleven  senators  chosen  by  districts.  There  were  also 
thirty-four  presidential  electors  to  be  voted  for,  and  one  con- 
gressman from  each  of  the  nine  districts  included  within  the 
city  limits.10  It  is  obvious  that  with  such  a  number  of  offices 
to  be  filled,  no  system  of  nomination  can  be  made  to  work 
satisfactorily;  for  the  individual  voter  or  delegate  cannot  have 
sufficient  time  to  consider  the  merits  of  each  candidate  for 
each  nomination.  There  are  three  methods  of  remedying  this 
difficulty,  all  three  of  which  should  be  applied  simultaneously, 
(i)  The  election  of  only  a  few  of  the  more  important  officers 
by  the  people,  —  the  remainder  to  be  appointed  by  the  mayor 
or  governor,  as  the  case  may  be;11  (2)  the  holding  of  separate 
primaries  for  the  election  of  delegates  to  different  conven- 

9  Including  county  officers,  as  New  York  City  and  County  are  practically  one 
and  the  same. 

10  See  article  by  A.  C.  Bernheim,  in  Political  Science  Quarterly,  III.  99-123. 
u  Sec  Bryce,  American  Commonwealth  (zd  ed.),  I.  615. 


SECT.  6.]  THE   TAMMANY  ORGANIZATION.  IOi 

tions ;  (3)  the  holding  of  municipal  elections  at  a  different 
time  from  State  and  national  elections.  The  last  reform  has 
already  been  adopted,12  and  its  adoption  is  a  decided  step  on 
the  road  towards  good  municipal  government. 

Previous  to  the  great  upheaval  of  1894,  nominations  in  New 
York  city  had  been  controlled  by  three  organizations,  the 
Tammany  Hall  Democracy,  the  Republican  organization,  and 
the  County  Democracy,  —  principally  by  the  two  former. 

6.  The  Tammany  Organization.  The  Tammany  Society,  or 
Columbian  Order,  was  organized  by  William  Mooney,  in  1789. 
The  name  "Tammany"  was  taken  from  that  of  an  Indian 
chief,  and  the  organization  imitates,  in  a  general  way,  Indian 
customs,  being  governed  by  "Sachems,"  or  chiefs,  and  a 
"sagamore,"  or  master  of  ceremonies.  Its  members  are  called 
"braves,"  and  its  place  of  meeting  the  "wigwam."  This 
organization,  which  is  of  a  social  character,  must  not  be  con- 
fused with  the  "Tammany  Hall  Democracy."  The  two  are 
separate  and  distinct  bodies,  the  only  relation  between  the 
organizations  being  the  fact  that  the  Democracy  has  its  head- 
quarters in  the  building  belonging  to  the  Tammany  Society, 
but  pays  rent  like  any  other  tenant.  It  is  true  that  the 
"  Sachems  "  of  the  Tammany  Society  are  also  members  of  the 
"  Democracy ; "  but  this  is  simply  because  they  choose  to 
become  members  of  both  organizations. 

The  Tammany  Hall  Democracy  calls  itself  the  "  regular " 
Democratic  party  in  New  York  city,  and  has  almost  invariably 
been  recognized  as  such  by  the  State  and  national  committees. 
The  basis  of  the  entire  organization  is  the  "General  Commit- 
tee of  Tammany  Hall,"  which  is  composed  of  "one  member 
for  every  fifty  Democratic  electors  in  each  assembly  dis- 
trict,"13 making  a  total  membership  of  about  four  thousand. 
This  general  committee,  the  members  of  which  are  elected  at 

12  By  the  Revised  Constitution  of  New  York,  adopted  in  1894,  it  is  provided  that 
the  elections  for  State  and  national  officers  shall  occur  in  the  even  numbered  years, 
and  the  election  for  city  and  county  officers  in  the  odd  numbered  years.     (Arts. 
III.  and  XII.) 

13  By-Laws  and  Regulations  of  the  General  Committee  of  Tammany  Hall,  Art.  I 
Sec.  i. 

LIBRARY 
UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA 


102  ABUSES  OF  THE  CAUCUS  OR  PRIMARY.    [CHAP.  V. 

the  party  primaries,  meets  once  a  month,  and  is  declared  to  be 
"the  repository  of  all  organic  power."14  In  October  of  each 
year  the  committee  sits  as  a  county  convention,  and  nominates 
the  party  candidates  for  the  various  county  offices,  — candidates 
for  the  other  offices  being  nominated,  in  the  first  instance,  by 
primaries  in  the  various  election  districts.  Within  the  gen- 
eral committee  is  an  executive  committee,  composed  of  one 
member  from  each  assembly  district,  —  who  is  always  the 
recognized  leader  of  the  party  in  his  district,  — together  with 
the  chairmen  of  the  committees  on  organization,  finance,  and 
correspondence  of  the  whole  body,  making  thirty-three  in 
all.16  By  this  committee,  according  to  one  of  the  prominent 
members  of  the  Tammany  organization,  "all  the  internal 
affairs  of  the  organization  are  directed,  its  candidates  for  office 
selected,  and  the  plans  for  every  campaign  matured."18  We 
have  here  a  frank  avowal  on  the  part  of  this  writer,  that  the 
regular  Democratic  candidates  in  New  York  city  are  selected 
by  this  executive  committee  of  thirty-three  men. 

Recent  writers  upon  this  subject  have  asserted  that  the  by- 
laws of  the  Tammany  organization  theoretically  provide  for 
nominations  by  all  the  Democratic  voters  in  the  various 
assembly  districts,  but  that  the  action  of  the  primaries  is  sub- 
ject to  the  inspection  of  the  central  executive  committee,  and 
hence  the  whole  system  is  a  farce.17  The  fact  is  as  stated; 
but  the  deduction  is  unwarranted.  There  is  no  express  pro- 
vision in  the  by-laws  for  the  holding  of  primaries  or  conven- 
tions, and  there  is  an  express  statement  that  the  committee  on 
organization,  which  has  charge  of  the  calling  and  conduct  of 
all  primaries  and  conventions,  "shall  in  their  discretion  have 
power  of  revision  and  substitution  of  all  nominations  hereafter 
made  by  conventions  called  by  this  general  committee  or  any 
district  committee  of  this  organization  whenever  the  honor, 
preservation,  and  integrity  of  this  organization  shall  require 

M  T.  Mitchell  Tyng,   Tammany  from  Within :   Tammany  Souvenir,  1893,  108. 

»  By-Laws  of  the  General  Committee,  Art.  XIV. 

18   Tammany  from  Within :  Souvenir,  108. 

17  A.  C.  Bernheim,  "  Party  Organizations  and  their  Nominations  to  Public  Office 
in  New  York  City,"  in  Political  Science  Quarterly,  III.  107  ;  F.  W.  Whitridge, 
The  Caucus  System,  19. 


SECT.  6.]  THE   TAMMANY  ORGANIZATION. 

such  action."18  No  member  of  Tammany  supposes  that  the 
primaries  really  nominate;  the  theory  of  the  organization  is 
that  the  Democratic  voters  delegate  all  their  power  of  control 
to  the  general  committee,  which,  in  turn,  delegates  its  power 
of  nominating  candidates  to  its  executive  committee  (acting 
through  the  committee  on  organization),  subject,  in  the  case 
of  nominations  for  county  offices,  to  the  approval  of  the  whole 
committee.  In  short,  the  Tammany  Democracy  is  a  strongly- 
centralized  political  society,  with  a  loyal  constituency  of  over 
100,000  voters,  and  no  sufficient  means  of  controlling  the 
heads  of  the  organization. 

Under  these  circumstances,  it  is  not  surprising  that  the 
Democratic  primaries  in  New  York  city  appear  to  be  very 
much  "cut  and  dried."  "The  published  notice  of  Tammany," 
says  Dr.  Bernheim,  in  describing  the  primaries  of  1887, 
"ordered  that  the  election  should  be  held  between  7.30  and 
9  P.  M.,  and  that  '  inspectors  must  fully  comply  with  the 
primary  election  laws  of  the  state  of  New  York  so  far  as  the 
same  are  applicable. '  The  extent  to  which  Tammany  regards 
the  election  laws  as  applicable  is  amusing.  In  the  second 
assembly  district  there  were  about  thirty  people  in  the  meet- 
ing rooms ;  the  reporter  remained  from  7. 30  to  8. 1 5  P.  M.  ,  and 
saw  no  meeting  whatever ;  before  leaving  the  room,  he  asked 
one  of  the  persons  in  attendance  whether  there  would  be  a 
meeting,  and  he  was  told  '  most  probably  not,  because  there  is 
no  opposition.'  In  the  fourth  assembly  district  the  reporter 
attended  from  7  to  9  P.  M.  ;  he  saw  people  sitting  about  the 
room  playing  poker  and  other  games;  the  meeting  was  not 
called  to  order  until  8.40  P.  M.,  because  the  man  with  the 
ballots  did  not  arrive.  It  was  then  moved  that  the  secretary 
cast  one  ballot  for  the  society,  which  being  done,  the  meeting 
was  adjourned."  19 

The  writer  then  goes  on  to  say  that  the  other  primaries 
were  conducted  in  the  same  manner.  "Nowhere,"  he  says, 
"  were  there  ballot  boxes  or  tally  lists ;  in  some  of  the  districts 

18  By-Laws,  Rules,  and  Regulations  of  the  General  Committee  of  Tammany  Hall, 
Art.  VIII.  Sec.  7. 

19  A.  C.  Bernheim  in  Political  Science  Quarterly,  III.  118. 


104  ABUSES  OF  THE  CAUCUS  OR  PRIMARY.    [CHAP.V. 

there  were  no  meetings,80  and  in  many  of  them  the  meetings 
were  not  held  at  the  time  appointed  by  the  committee  on 
organization.  Evidently  Tammany  does  not  regard  the  elec- 
tion laws  as  'applicable '  very  far,  for  it  holds  its  elections  at 
such  time  and  in  such  manner  as  it  pleases." 

Since  1887,  the  condition  of  things  does  not  appear  to  have 
materially  changed.  The  first  thing  needed  in  the  case  of  the 
Democratic  primaries  is  the  strict  enforcement  of  the  existing 
State  laws  governing  primary  elections,  and  the  requirement 
of  some  definite  mode  of  procedure,  instead  of  leaving  it  to  be 
determined  by  party  rules.  But,  of  course,  there  cannot  be 
any  reform  so  long  as  the  great  mass  of  the  Democratic  voters 
are  willing  that  their  nominations  shall  be  dictated  by  the 
central  executive  committee.  If,  however,  the  voters  are  by 
statute  given  a  fair  opportunity  of  expressing  their  views  at 
the  primaries,  they  may  some  time  revolt  against  the  machine 
and  its  rules;  in  which  case  their  right  to  have  the  names  of 
the  candidates  whom  they  have  nominated  placed  upon  the 
official  ballot,  will  be  protected  by  the  strong  arm  of  the  law.ai 
The  strength  of  the  Tammany  organization  lies  in  the  fact 
that  the  voters  have  abdicated  their  own  powers;  its  danger 
has  been  in  the  acquisition  of  this  enormous  power  by  unscru- 
pulous men,  who,  by  their  control  of  the  nomination  and  elec- 
tion of  all  the  municipal  offices,  aided  by  the  spoils  system, 
have  been  able  to  keep  themselves  in  power  by  means  of  the 
enormous  patronage  at  their  disposal.22 

7.  The  Republican  Organization  in  New  York  City  prior  to  1883. 
For  a  considerable  period  after  the  close  of  the  Civil  War, 
the  Republican  party  organization  in  New  York  city  was  in 
a  deplorably  corrupt  condition.  William  M.  Tweed  owed  his 
extraordinary  lease  of  power  quite  as  much  to  his  heelers  in 

*>  For  instance,  in  the  sixth  assembly  district  one  hundred  and  fifty  persons  were 
chosen  as  delegates  to  the  various  conventions  at  a  meeting  which  never  took  place. 

21  For  the  nature  and  extent  of  such  legal  restrictions,  see  chapter  ix. 

23  Continued  control  of  the  offices,  and  hence  success  on  election  day,  are  of 
course  essential  to  the  retention  of  power  by  the  machine.  For  this  reason,  each 
member  of  the  all-powerful  executive  committee,  who  is  always  the  leader  of  his 
assembly  district,  is  obliged  to  keep  up  the  party  majority  in  his  district,  at  the  risk 
of  losing  his  position,  with  the  accompanying  share  of  the  spoils. 


SECT.;-]    REPUBLICAN  ORGANIZATION  IN  N.  Y.  CITY.    IO5 

the  Republican  District  Associations  as  to  the  machinery 
of  his  own  party.23  Finally,  several  years  after  the  honest 
element  of  both  parties  had  succeeded  in  ousting  Tweed  and 
his  gang  of  robbers  from  their  place  of  power,  a  special  com- 
mittee was  appointed  by  the  Republican  State  Committee  to 
reform  the  party  organization.  Of  the  751  names  upon  the 
list  of  Republican  voters  in  one  district,  only  279  proved  to 
be  those  of  bond  fide  residents  of  the  district,  the  rest  being 
names  of  deceased  persons,  or  of  persons  who  had  moved  away. 
The  same  state  of  things  was  found  to  exist,  to  a  greater  or  less 
extent,  in  all  the  assembly  districts  of  the  city.24 

As  a  result  of  their  work,  the  committee  submitted  a  plan 
of  organization  which  was  adopted,  and  which  remained  sub- 
stantially in  force  until  1883.  This  scheme  of  organization 
has  been  described  by  Mr.  F.  W.  Whitridge  in  his  admirable 
little  book  on  the  "Caucus  System."25  In  each  of  the 
assembly  districts  there  was  a  Republican  District  Associa- 
tion, a  sort  of  permanent  club  sending  delegates  to  the  Repub- 
lican Central  Committee,  which  committee  had  general  charge 
of  the  affairs  of  the  party  in  the  city.  Inside,  there  was  a 
small  executive  committee,  which,  as  in  the  case  of  the  Tam- 
many organization,  was  the  "power  behind  the  throne."  In 
theory,  a  meeting  of  one  of  the  district  associations  was  a 
caucus  or  primary  of  the  Republican  voters  of  that  assembly 
district.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  however,  no  Republican  was 
allowed  to  vote  at  a  primary  unless  he  was  a  member  of  the 
District  Association.  In  order  to  become  a  member,  his 
name  had  to  be  proposed  by  some  member,  posted,  referred  to 
a  committee,  and  finally  voted  upon,  as  in  a  social  club ;  if  he 
obtained  a  majority  vote  of  the  members  present,  he  became  a 
member  after  taking  a  solemn  oath  "to  submit  to  the  legally- 
expressed  action  of  the  association,  and  of  the  central  com- 
mittee," and  to  support  loyally  all  the  party  nominees.  Any 

23  From  the  beginning,  no  Republican  voter  has  been  permitted  to  vote  at  a  pri- 
mary unless  his  name  is  enrolled  on  the  membership  roll  of  the  Assembly  District 
Association  of  his  district. 

24  See  Article  by  George  Walton  Green,  entitled  "  Our  Nominating  Machines," 
in  Atlantic  Monthly,  LI  I.  323. 

25  The  Caucus  System,  16. 


I06  ABUSES  OF  THE  CAUCUS  OR  PRIMARY.    [CHAP.  V. 

member  reported  by  the  Committee  on  Discipline  to  be  at  all 
lacking  in  obedience  could  be  expelled  from  the  association  by 
a  majority  vote  of  the  members  present. 

As  a  natural  result  of  such  regulations,  the  district  associa- 
tions quickly  drifted  into  "close  corporations"  of  interested 
politicians.  Probably  nine-tenths  of  the  Republican  voters  of 
New  York  city  were  excluded  from  membership  in  the  district 
associations,  and  hence,  for  all  nomination  purposes,  were 
completely  disfranchised.  In  their  efforts  to  prevent  Demo- 
crats from  voting  at  Republican  primaries,  which  had  been 
such  an  evil  in  the  days  of  Tweed,  the  reformers  now  pre- 
vented even  Republicans  from  taking  part  in  the  nomination 
of  party  candidates.  The  reformed  Republican  organization 
soon  fell  into  the  hands  of  the  "machine,"  as  is  shown  by  a 
letter  written  in  1880,  by  Mr.  George  Bliss,  one  of  the  party 
leaders,  to  Hon.  Chester  A.  Arthur,  then  chairman  of  the 
Republican  State  Committee: 

.  .  .  The  rolls  are  deceptive.  ...  In  one  district  half  the  names 
of  those  on  the  rolls  are  not  known  in  the  district.  These  bogus  names 
afford  a  convenient  means  for  fraudulent  voting.  The  rolls  of  many  of 
the  districts  are  full  of  the  names  of  men  not  Republicans,  and  are  used 
by  the  managers  to  perpetuate  their  control  of  the  associations.  On  the 
other  hand,  desirable  members,  good  Republicans,  who  have  an  abso- 
lute right  to  become  members  are  excluded.  Sometimes  this  is  done 
by  direct  rejection,  but  often  by  a  refusal  to  vote  upon  the  names 
presented.89 

Three  years  later,  the  condition  of  affairs  was  even  worse. 
"  Not  one  in  three  of  the  presidents  of  the  twenty-six  Repub- 
lican associations  is  a  man  of  ordinary  capacity,  or  even  of 
ordinary  education,"  said  the  New  York  Times,  shortly  after 
the  election  of  1883;  "sixteen  of  the  twenty-six  hold  city, 
State,  or  federal  office.  .  .  .  From  alderman  to  judge  of  the 
supreme  court,  no  name  appears  on  the  party  ticket  which 
has  not  been  selected  by  this  band  of  office-holders  and  office- 
seekers.  They  send  the  delegates  who  assume  to  speak  for  the 

38  Sec  The  Independent  Movement  in  New  York,  by  Junius  (Dorman  B.  Eaton), 
New  York,  1880,  102.  (Questions  of  the  Day  Series.) 


SECT. 8.]        COUNTY  DEMOCRACY  IN  N.  Y.  CITY. 

80,000  New  York  Republicans  at  a  state  convention,  and,  save 
for  the  casual  jurisdiction  of  the  state  committee,  there  is  no 
authority  in  the  party  which  they  cannot  set  at  defiance. " 

8.  The  County  Democracy  in  New  York  City.  The  "County 
Democracy  "  was  organized  in  1881,  as  a  result  of  a  combina- 
tion of  the  various  anti-Tammany  factions  of  the  Democratic 
party  in  the  county  of  New  York.  The  "  Plan  of  Organiza- 
tion," which  was  drawn  up  by  a  self-appointed  committee  of 
one  hundred  prominent  Democratic  citizens,  provided  among 
other  things,  that  "all  Democratic  voters  who  voted  in  the 
election  district  in  which  they  reside  at  any  primary  elec- 
tion duly  called  under  this  plan,  held  in  the  district  during 
the  next  preceding  or  the  current  year,  shall  be  members  of 
the  election  district  association  of  the  district,"27  the  inten- 
tion being  to  give  all  Democratic  voters  an  opportunity  to  vote 
at  the  party  primaries.  In  addition,  it  was  made  the  duty  of 
the  secretary  of  each  assembly  district  committee  to  keep  a 
corrected  list  of  the  members  voting  at  all  primaries,  and  to 
give  four  days'  notice  of  the  time  and  place  of  all  primaries 
by  publication  in  one  or  more  of  the  principal  Democratic 
newspapers.  At  the  primary,  the  voter  was  obliged  to  state  to 
the  judges  his  name  and  residence,  and  the  persons  for  whom 
he  desired  to  vote,  or  else  was  permitted  to  cast  an  open  or 
unfolded  ballot.  Finally  there  was  a  provision  that  all  nomi- 
nations should  be  made  by  conventions  of  delegates  chosen  by 
the  voters  in  the  district  in  which  the  candidate  was  to  be 
voted  for.28 

With  such  liberal  rules  in  regard  to  participation  in  the 
primaries,  one  would  naturally  expect  to  find  a  more  satisfac- 
tory state  of  affairs  than  in  the  case  of  the  primaries  of  the 
Tammany  Democracy.  Yet  the  primaries  held  under  the 
regime  of  the  county  Democracy  soon  fell  into  a  state  of  which 
the  following  incident,  in  1887,  is  an  example. 

"In  one  of  the  election  districts  of  the  sixth  assembly  dis- 

*  See  Political  Science  Quarterly,  III.  108. 

28  There  was  an  assembly  district  committee,  composed  of  one  delegate  for  each 
one  hundred  Democratic  votes  cast  in  each  election  precinct.  There  was  also  a 
county  committee,  composed  of  delegates  from  the  various  assembly  districts. 


108  ABUSES  OF  THE  CAUCUS  OR  PRIMARY.    [CHAP.V. 

trict,  where  one  delegate  was  chosen,  only  one  vote  was  cast ; 
after  a  little  while  the  candidate  for  delegate  dropped  twenty- 
two  ballots  in  the  box,  and  wrote  on  the  tally-sheet  twenty- 
two  names.  The  ballot  box  was  opened,  and  the  result 
declared  that  the  candidate  was  elected  delegate  by  twenty- 
three  votes.  This  delegate-elect  foretold  with  great  accuracy 
the  number  of  votes  cast  and  the  successful  candidates  in  the 
other  election  districts."29 

Whatever  the  theory  of  the  leaders  of  the  County  Democ- 
racy, their  conception  of  the  "application"  of  the  primary 
election  laws  was  hardly  distinguishable  from  that  of  the 
Tammany  chieftains.  It  is  evident  that  so  long  as  the  voters 
neglect  to  attend  the  primaries,  or  to  insist  on  their  rights,  the 
laws  of  the  State  governing  primary  elections  will  continue  to 
be  a  dead  letter. 

9.  The  Present  Condition  of  the  New  York  Primaries.  It  can- 
not be  said  that  the  condition  of  the  New  York  primaries  has 
improved  since  1883.  In  that  year  a  revolt  took  place  in  the 
Republican  organization,  and  again  the  by-laws  were  radically 
amended,  with  the  object  of  giving  all  Republican  voters,  and 
none  but  Republican  voters,  an  opportunity  to  vote  at  the 
party  primaries.  These  rules,  which  will  be  described  in  a 
later  chapter,  seemed  likely  to  accomplish  the  purpose  of  the 
framers;  but  in  practice  things  soon  drifted  back  into  the  old 
rut,  and  the  condition  of  affairs  is  now  little,  if  at  all, 
improved.  A  new  re-organization  has  been  talked  of,  and  at 
one  time,  in  1895,  it  looked  as  if  a  movement  in  that  direction 
was  about  to  be  made;  but  the  influences  which  control  the 
party  in  New  York  city  do  not  leave  room  for  much  hope  of 
success. 

The  revolt  against  the  Tammany  regime  in  the  Democratic 
party  has  already  been  referred  to.  The  County  Democracy, 
however,  never  succeeded  in  getting  recognized  as  the  "regu- 
lar "  party  organization,  and  it  never  wielded  any  great  influ- 
ence in  the  party  councils.  The  condition  of  its  primary 
meetings,  as  we  have  seen,  soon  became  as  unsatisfactory  as 
those  of  the  Tammany  organization,  which  it  sought  to  over- 

39  Political  Science  Quarterly,  III.  118. 


SECT.  10.]          BOSS-RULE  IN  NEW   YORK  CITY.  IOg 

throw,  and  about  two  years  ago  it  appears  to  have  quietly  col- 
lapsed. As  for  Tammany,  it  was  scotched  in  the  election  of 
1894,  but  its  organization  is  apparently  unimpaired.  Although 
it  has  lost  its  control  in  municipal  affairs  for  a  time,  neverthe- 
less, its  grip  on  the  Democratic  organization  of  the  State,  as 
well  as  of  the  city,  is  still  firm,  and  not  to  be  easily  shaken 
off.  At  the  present  writing  there  is  a  strong  movement  among 
the  rank  and  file  of  the  Democratic  voters  of  New  York  State 
to  throw  off  the  intolerable  yoke  that  has  so  long  rested  upon 
them.  The  division  in  the  Democratic  party  on  the  financial 
question  certainly  affords  a  splendid  opportunity  for  a  thorough 
re-organization  of  the  party  both  in  the  city  and  State,  and  the 
election  of  the  best  men  to  positions  on  the  State,  county,  and 
district  committees. 

10.  Boss-rule  in  New  York  City.  It  is  evident,  from  what  we 
have  seen,  that  the  caucus  or  primary,  in  the  true  sense  of  the 
word,  does  not  exist  in  New  York  city.  In  the  case  of  the 
Republican  party,  the  election  of  delegates  to  the  various 
conventions  in  a  given  assembly  district  is  made,  not  by  a 
primary  meeting  of  the  party  voters  of  that  district,  but  by  a 
small  select  club,  — a  "close  corporation  "  composed  largely  of 
professional  politicians  and  their  friends.  The  only  difference 
between  this  state  of  affairs  and  that  under  the  Tammany 
regime  is  that  in  the  latter  case  the  Democratic  voters,  or  at 
least  a  majority  of  them,  delegate  their  power  of  making  nomi- 
nations to  the  "general  committee,"  while  in  the  former  the 
assembly  district  associations  have  usurped  the  power  of  mak- 
ing nominations  without  any  authority  from  the  rank  and  file 
of  the  party  voters.  In  the  case  of  both  organizations,  there 
is  a  marked  tendency  to  consolidate  the  nominating  machinery 
in  the  hands  of  a  few  men.  In  both  organizations,  the  chair- 
man of  the  central  executive  committee,  by  means  of  his  enor- 
mous power  over  the  primaries,  combined  with  the  patronage 
at  his  disposal,  can  easily  maintain  himself  in  power.  In 
the  case  of  the  Tammany  organization,  the  career  of  "Boss 
Croker  "  is  an  illustration  of  this  centralizing  tendency ;  while 
in  the  Republican  party  the  enormous  influence  wielded  by 
"  Boss  Platt "  shows  only  too  plainly  what  can  be  accom- 


IIO  ABUSES  OF  THE  CAUCUS  OR  PRIMARY.    [CHAP.  V. 

plished  by  a  shrewd  man  under  the  present  un-democratic 
system. 

Reference  has  already  been  made  to  the  upheaval  in  New 
York  city  in  1894.  The  organization  and  work  of  the  Com- 
mittee of  Seventy  will  be  discussed  in  a  later  chapter;  *°  but  it 
is  interesting  to  note,-  in  this  connection,  that  the  reformers 
have  been  more  or  less  hindered  and  blocked  in  their  work  by 
the  hostile  influence  of  Mr.  Platt,  made  effective  by  his  con- 
trol over  the  Republican  organization  in  New  York  city. 

The  only  way  in  which  the  voters  of  New  York  city  can  free 
themselves  from  boss  rule  is  by  a  revolt  of  the  voters  of  each 
party  against  the  machine  and  the  adoption  of  a  new  party 
organization  upon  a  right  basis.  The  difficulties  in  the  way  of 
such  an  undertaking  are  of  course  enormous.  It  would  demand 
the  expenditure  of  an  immense  amount  of  time  and  thought 
by  the  leaders  of  the  movement,  combined  with  the  hearty 
and  enthusiastic  co-operation  of  all  public-spirited  citizens. 
If  the  movement  in  the  two  parties  could  occur  simultaneously, 
the  chances  of  success  would  be  much  greater  than  if  action 
were  undertaken  separately.  In  the  latter  case  the  "  machine  " 
would  immediately  set  up  the  cry  that  party  success  was 
imperilled,  and  large  numbers  of  the  rank  and  file,  with  whom 
party  victoiy  is  often  of  more  importance  than  the  main- 
tenance of  right  principles,  would  be  induced  to  vote  the 
"regular"  ticket. 

But  let  us  suppose  that  this  dream  of  a  thorough  re-organi- 
zation of  both  the  great  political  parties  in  New  York  city 
should  perchance  become  an  accomplished  fact,  what  then? 
Would  the  work  of  the  reformer  be  finished?  Most  decidedly 
not.  No  fresh  starting  of  the  wheels  of  party  government, 
no  mere  adoption  of  carefully  prepared  by-laws  can  result  in 
any  permanent  good,  so  long  as  the  interest  of  the  great  mass 
of  the  voters  of  both  parties  is  confined  to  occasional  outbursts 
of  public  virtue.  What  is  needed  is  a  steady,  persistent 
attention  to  political  matters,  — a  deep  realization  of  the  fact 
that  in  a  government  such  as  ours  "eternal  vigilance  is  the 
price  of  liberty." 

•°  Post,  chapter  x.  §  4. 


SECT,  ir.]  PRIMARIES  IN  PHILADELPHIA.  Iri 

ii.  Primaries  in  Philadelphia.  In  New  York  the  machine 
has  owed  its  sway  to  the  fact  that  the  power  of  making  nomi- 
nations has  by  the  party  rules  been  given  into  the  hands  of 
committees  or  of  self-perpetuating  clubs.  In  Philadelphia, 
however,  the  bosses  seem  to  allow  the  voters  to  select  dele- 
gates, and  then  deliberately  set  aside  their  verdict,  as  rendered 
at  the  primaries.  At  nominating  conventions  in  that  city, 
according  to  a  Philadelphian,  "the  man  who  succeeded  in 
getting  the  temporary  chairmanship  always  got  the  nomina- 
tion without  regard  to  the  number  of  delegates  elected  for 
him."31  A  writer  in  the  Penn  Monthly,  in  1881,  indignantly 
asks : 

Against  such  influences,  what  can  the  honest  and  unorganized 
public  do?  If  they  select  delegates  not  desired  by  the  politicians, 
certificates  are  given  to  those  not  elected ;  or  if  that  is  imprudent,  the 
certificates  are  thrown  out  by  the  convention  to  which  they  are  directed. 
The  best  proof  of  this  fact  is  that  for  years  the  list  of  nominees  for 
office  in  this  city  has  been  publicly  known  days,  weeks  and  sometimes 
months  before  the  delegates  to  choose  them  were  named.82 

During  the  last  twelve  years  the  work  of  the  Committee  of 
One  Hundred  and  similar  organizations  has  considerably 
improved  the  state  of  affairs  in  Philadelphia.  Another  step 
in  the  way  of  reform,  so  far  as  the  Republican  party  is  con- 
cerned, was  taken  in  1893,  in  the  adoption  of  a  new  set  of 
rules  governing  the  party  primaries  and  conventions.33  They 
contain  careful  provisions  for  the  registration  of  the  party 
voters,  and  at  the  same  time  are  so  framed  as  to  give  every 
Republican  voter  an  opportunity  to  vote  at  the  party  prima- 
ries. They  also  apparently  contain  every  possible  safeguard 
against  falsification  of  the  returns  of  the  primaries,  the  re- 
fusal to  admit  to  conventions  duly  elected  delegates,  and  those 
other  fraudulent  practices  by  which  the  machine  politicians 
have  successfully  nullified  the  wishes  of  the  party  voters. 

31  North  American  Review,  CXXXVII.  263. 

32  Mr.  Mayer  Sulzberger  in  Penn  Monthly,  XII.  184. 

83  New  Rules  of  the  Union  Republican  Party  of  Philadelphia,  1893.  The  main 
features  of  these  rules  will  be  discussed  in  chapter  viii. 


112  ABUSES  OF  THE  CAUCUS  OR  PRIMARY.    [CHAP.  V. 

Whether  these  new  rules  will  prove  successful  in  accomplish- 
ing the  purposes  for  which  they  were  framed,  it  is  as  yet  too 
early  to  determine.84  At  all  events,  they  ought  to  be  supple- 
mented by  the  enforcement  of  statutory  regulations,  punish- 
ing severely  any  violation  of  the  party  rules,  as  well  as  all 
forms  of  fraud  and  corruption,  either  at  the  primaries  or  at 
conventions. 

12.  The  Baltimore  Primaries.  That  the  condition  of  affairs 
in  Baltimore  has  been,  in  some  respects,  even  worse  than  that 
in  New  York  and  Philadelphia,  is  evident  from  the  following 
graphic  description  by  an  ex-member  of  the  Maryland  Legisla- 
ture of  the  situation  in  1879: 

The  roughs  of  both  parties  unite  to  carry  for  each  other  primaries 
in  their  class  interest,  to  drive  away  the  respectable  element,  and  when 
not  numerically  strong  enough,  to  stuff  the  ballot  box  with  "  pudding 
tickets,"  —  one  ticket  sometimes  enclosing  some  twenty  slips,  —  which 
the  rascally  election  judges  deliberately  open  and  count  for  their  nomi- 
nee. .  .  .  Each  party  in  Baltimore  is  instructed  by  their  city  conven- 
tion to  receive  votes  from  a  certified  court  copy  of  the  last  revision  of 
registration.  Sometimes  they  obey ;  but  as  we  have  over  thirty  thousand 
graveyard  and  imaginary  names  on  the  registration  lists,  these  are  used 
by  primary  election  manipulators  for  hired  repeaters.  This  being  the 
case,  gentlemen  will  no  longer  attend  primaries  or  support  the  class  of 
men  they  force  on  each  party." 

In  speaking  of  the  primaries  in  1879,  tne  same  writer  says: 
"A  city  councilman  and  member  of  the  'Three  Tenths  Social 
Club,'  together  with  a  city  magistrate,  brought  wagon  loads 
of  hired  repeaters  from  the  Eighteenth  ward,  'voted  '  them  for 
the  ring  candidate  in  the  Twentieth  ward,  and  then  drove 
them  over  to  the  Eleventh  ward,  where  they  again  voted  their 
roughs  for  the  ring  candidate.  The  reward  of  one  of  the  prin- 

**  According  to  the  testimony  of  Mr.  William  B.  Ahem,  Secretary  of  the  Re- 
publican City  Campaign  Committee,  under  these  rules,  which  were  revised  in  1894, 
both  the  primaries  and  conventions  in  Philadelphia  have  been  more  fairly  con- 
ducted than  ever  before. 

*  "  Facts  about  the  Caucus  and  the  Primary,"  by  George  Walton  Green,  in 
North  American  Review,  CXXXVII.  261. 


SECT.  12.  J  THE  BALTIMORE  PRIMARIES. 

cipals  for  this  sort  of  work  was  a  $1,600  clerkship  in  the  city 
appeal  court."86 

Here,  as  in  New  York  and  Philadelphia,  the  cement  which 
holds  the  party  organization  together  is  the  intimate  connec- 
tion between  the  control  of  the  nominating  machinery  and  the 
spoils  of  office.  The  present  condition  of  affairs  in  Baltimore 
is  set  forth  in  a  report  of  Civil  Service  Commissioner  Roosevelt 
to  the  President  in  1891.  Mr.  Roosevelt  was  notified  that  the 
provision  of  the  Civil  Service  Rules,  prohibiting  the  participa- 
tion of  Federal  office-holders  "  in  the  manipulation  of  political 
primary  meetings,."  was  being  violated  in  the  Federal  offices  in 
Baltimore;  and,  accordingly,  he  conducted  there  a  searching 
investigation  into  the  alleged  violations  of  the  law. 

The  primaries  in  which  the  alleged  violations  of  the  civil 
service  rules  occurred  were  held  on  March  30,  1891,  and 
were  characterized  by  a  very  bitter  contest  between  the 
" Johnson-Airey "  and  the  "Henderson-Stone"  factions  of  the 
Republican  party.37  What  occurred  is  thus  described  by  Mr. 
Roosevelt : 

Many  of  the  witnesses  of  each  faction  testified  that  the  leaders  of 
the  opposite  faction  in  their  ward  had  voted  "repeaters,"  Democrats, 
and  men  living  outside  of  the  ward,  in  great  numbers,  and  I  am  inclined 
to  believe  that  in  this  respect  there  is  much  reason  to  regard  the  testi- 
mony of  each  side  as  correct  in  its  outline  of  the  conduct  of  the  other. 
Accusations  of  ballot-box  stuffing  were  freely  made  with  much  appear- 
ance of  justification.  A  number  of  fights  took  place.  In  many  wards 
there  were  several  arrests;  in  one  or  two  cases  so  many  men  were 
arrested  that  the  police  patrol  wagons  could  not  accommodate  them. 
.  .  .  One  of  the  incidents  of  the  day  was  an  effort  on  the  part  of  Mar- 
shal Airey  to  drag  a  judge  whom  he  accused  of  misconduct,  out  of  the 
window,  a  fierce  scuffle  being  the  result.  In  another  ward  a  Johnson 
clerk  detected,  as  he  thought,  signs  of  cheating  and  broke  open  the  bal- 
lot-box, taking  out  two  huge  handfuls  of  so-called  "  pudding  "  ballots,88 

88  North  American  Review,  CXXXVII.  261. 

87  Mr.  Johnson  was  the  postmaster,  and  Mr.  Airey  the  United  States  marshal 
in  Baltimore.    Messrs.  Henderson  and  Stone  had  been  their  unsuccessful  competi- 
tors for  those  positions. 

88  A  "pudding"  ballot  is  composed  of  a  number  of  ballots  folded  together  so 
as  to  appear  as  only  one. 

8 


U4  ABUSES  OF  THE  CAUCUS  OR  PRIMARY.    [CHAP.  V. 

whereupon  the  two  Henderson  judges  threw  him  out  of  the  window, 
and  all  three  were  arrested.  ...  In  a  number  of  wards  the  election 
was  practically  stopped,  on  account  of  the  disorder,  early  in  the  day. 
There  was  a  general  feeling  that  whichever  side  had  the  majority 
of  the  judges  had  the  election.  .  .  .  There  was  considerable  com- 
plaint of  bribery;  in  some  cases  votes  were  said  to  have  been 
bought  for  money ;  in  others  the  charge  was  that  outsiders,  not  Repub- 
licans, possibly  not  residents  of  the  ward,  had  been  offered  drinks  to 
participate  in  the  primary.  Most  of  the  witnesses  spoke  of  the  cheating 
in  a  matter  of  course  way,  as  being  too  universal  and  too  common  in 
primaries  generally  to  be  worthy  of  notice,  and  a  great  number  of  them 
did  not  seem  to  bear  any  special  malice  against  their  opponents  for 
having  cheated  successfully,  —  if  anything  rather  admiring  them  for 
their  shrewdness,  —  and  frankly  testifying  that  it  was  only  lack  of  oppor- 
tunity that  had  hindered  them  from  doing  as  much  themselves.  Two 
of  the  witnesses,  both  Henderson  adherents,  employees  of  the  custom 
house  testified  with  refreshing  and  cheerful  frankness  to  this  effect. 
One  of  them,  Mr.  Homer,  remarked  anent  fixing  up  "  pudding"  ballots, 
"I  would  have  done  the  same  thing  myself;  I  believe  in  doing  any- 
thing to  win."  This  individual's  son  was  one  of  the  judges  of  election. 
Whether  he  shared  his  parent's  latitudinarian  views  of  political  morality, 
I  do  not  know.*9 

The  participation  of  office-holders  in  the  management  of  the 
primaries  was  very  strikingly  brought  out  in  the  testimony. 
All  the  witnesses  seemed  honestly  to  believe  that  the  business 
of  managing  primaries  and  of  politics  generally  belonged,  by 
right,  to  office-holders  and  office-seekers.  Mr.  Homer,  the 
custom-house  employee  already  referred  to,  in  answer  to  the 
question  whether  it  was  a  "well-recognized  state  of  affairs  that 
it  is  the  office-holder's  business  to  manage  the  primaries," 
answered,  "  Of  course ;  why  not  ?  "  *°  The  testimony  of  Mr. 
Reed,  another  custom-house  employee,  upon  the  same  subject 
was  as  follows : 

Q.    As  a  matter  of  fact,  in  your  ward,  it  is  the  office-holders 

89  Report  of  Commissioner  Roosevelt,  concerning  Political  Assessments  and  the  Use  of 
Official  Influence  to  control  Elections  in  the  Federal  Offices  at  Baltimore,  Md.  (Wash- 
ington, 1891),  2,  3. 

«>  Ibid.,  134. 


SECT.  13.]  CAUCUSES  IN  BOSTON.  Hj 

who  run  the  primaries  ?  A.  Exactly ;  they  are  the  ones  that 
ought  to. 

Q.  It  is  mainly  the  office-holders  who  run  the  primaries? 
A.  Most  undoubtedly,  —  the  great  majority  are  office-holders 
or  people  who  want  office.41 

13.  Caucuses  in  Boston.  Although  Boston  has  never  fallen 
into  the  hands  of  plunderers,  and  although  the  interference  of 
Federal  office-holders  has  not  been  so  strikingly  displayed  as 
in  Baltimore,  nevertheless,  even  here  the  caucuses  of  at  least 
one  party  offer  a  puzzling  problem  to  the  political  reformer. 
A  free  fight  in  the  Democratic  ward-room,  followed  by  the 
secession  or  "bolt,"  as  it  is  called,  of  the  defeated  faction, 
was  until  very  recently  the  rule  rather  than  the  exception; 
while  ballot-box  stuffing  and  other  fraudulent  practices  are 
still  of  common  occurrence.  In  May,  1893,  Democratic  cau- 
cuses were  held  in  the  different  wards  for  the  purpose  of  choos- 
ing members  of  the  ward  and  city  committee,  — the  committee 
which  was  to  sit,  in  the  fall,  as  a  convention  to  nominate 
the  party  candidate  for  mayor.  The  following  is  a  newspaper 
account  of  the  caucus  in  Ward  12.  The  proceedings  illustrate 
extreme  caucus  methods :  ^ 

THE   RUM   DEMOCRACY. 

IT   WAS   TOO    MUCH    FOR   HONEST   JOHN   QUINN   IN   WARD   TWELVE. 

The  rum  Democracy  of  Ward  1 2  would  have  none  of  Honest  John 
Quinn,  Jr.,  last  night,  and  threw  him  over  for  good  and  all.  It  was  done 
in  such  a  cold-blooded  way  that  the  followers  of  Mr.  Quinn  bolted  and 
held  a  caucus  and  elected  members  of  the  City  Committee. 

Some  time  before  the  caucus  the  ward  room  was  the  scene  of  much 
excitement,  and  it  was  openly  asserted  that  Quinn  would  not  get  a 
chance  to  do  anything.  A  Lieutenant,  a  Sergeant,  and  eighteen  patrol- 
men were  on  hand  to  preserve  the  public  peace  and  see  that  the  oppos- 
ing forces  did  not  come  to  blows. 

41  Report  of  Commissioner  Roosevelt,  concerning  Political  Assessments  and  the  Use 
of  Official  Influence  to  control  Elections  in  the  Federal  Offices  at  Baltimore,  Md. 
(Washington,  1891),  141. 
42  This  account  is  taken  from  the  Boston  Journal  of  May  ir,  1893. 


H6  ABUSES  OF  THE  CAUCUS  OR  PRIMARY.    [CHAP.V. 

There  was  a  full  hall  when  Chairman  J.  H.  Mullane  of  the  Ward 
Committee  mounted  the  rostrum  to  read  the  call  for  the  caucus.  He 
had  hardly  done  so  when  Representative  John  Quinn,  Jr.,  standing 
directly  in  front  of  him,  called  out  in  clear,  loud  tones,  "  Mr.  Chair- 
man." Chairman  Mullane  looked  straight  ahead,  and,  strange  to  say, 
he  did  not  seem  to  see  Mr.  Quinn  at  all,  although  he  is  a  man  of  large 
size,  and  tall  —  above  the  average.  All  this  time  Mr.  Quinn  was  yelling 
"  Mr.  Chairman  "  at  the  top  of  his  voice,  but  Mr.  Mullane  discovered 
over  a  little  distance  another  man,  Cornelius  F.  Desmond,  and  imagined 
that  he  heard  him  nominate  John  Morrissey  for  Chairman.  Taking  it 
for  granted  that  this  was  so,  he  put  the  motion  and  declared  it  carried, 
though  there  was  not  an  over  loud  "yea"  and  a  somewhat  emphatic 
"  nay." 

Thereupon  Mr.  Morrissey  clambered  over  the  rail  in  the  midst  of 
most  emphatic  protests  and  hisses  and  howls  from  all  parts  of  the  room. 
Mr.  Quinn  loudly  protested  to  all  this  illegality,  as  he  denounced  it,  but 
his  words  fell  upon  deaf  ears,  and  the  officers  of  the  caucus  went  on 
with  the  transaction  of  business,  just  as  if  there  were  quiet,  instead  of  a 
babel  of  voices  demanding  justice. 

Finally  Mr.  Quinn  went  over  to  another  part  of  the  hall  and  gathered 
his  followers  about  him.  Getting  upon  a  table,  he  began  to  speak.  "  On 
one  side  of  that  rail,"  he  said,  "are  the  honest  Democrats  of  this  ward, 
and  on  the  other  the  traitors  to  the  party.  We  call  on  you  as  men  to 
protest  against  the  proceedings  here  to-night." 

Just  here  Chairman  Morrissey  rushed  around  from  behind  the  rail, 
and,  reaching  up,  pulled  Mr.  Quinn  off  the  table,  and  two  or  three 
other  men  jumped  into  the  mtUe,  and  pulled  Mr.  Quinn  violently 
toward  the  door,  as  if  they  would  throw  him  downstairs.  Just  here, 
however,  some  of  his  friends  reinforced  him  and  brought  him  back 
into  the  hall.  All  this  time  Mr.  Quinn  was  calling  on  the  police  in 
the  name  of  the  law,  but  they  offered  him  no  aid.  He  got  up  on  the 
table  again  and  denounced  in  scathing  terms  the  rum  Democracy  which 
had  made  the  ward  captive  and  was  trampling  on  the  rights  of  the 
people.  He  closed  by  calling  for  three  cheers  for  Governor  Russell  and 
asked  his  followers  to  go  forth  with  him  to  elect  a  ticket  for  members 
of  the  City  Committee.  At  this  point  Chairman  Morrissey  rushed  up 
to  a  police  officer  and  ordered  him  to  put  Quinn  out  of  the  room. 
The  officer  was  moving  to  do  this  when  Mr.  Quinn  and  his  friends 
went  out  of  their  own  accord. 


SECT.  13.]  CAUCUSES  IN  BOSTON. 

Journalists,  however,  are  apt  to  exaggerate  the  details  of 
such  scenes.  Perhaps  the  testimony  given  before  the  special 
Recess  Committee  appointed  by  the  House  of  Representatives 
of  the  Massachusetts  Legislature  of  1893,  to  investigate  the 
general  subject  of  caucus  reform,  may  be  more  authentic.43 

A  Democratic  member  of  the  Massachusetts  Legislature 
stated  that  the  Democratic  caucuses  in  Boston  are  simply 
meetings  to  ratify  the  dictates  of  the  ward  committees.  In 
each  ward  the  ward  committee,  composed  of  ten  or  a  dozen 
men,  make  a  "  slate  nomination  "  of  those  whom  they  desire  to 
be  the  party  candidates  for  representatives  in  the  legislature 
from  that  ward.  These  slate  nominations  are  sure  to  be  vic- 
torious at  the  caucus,  no  matter  what  the  vote  may  be.  The 
voters  who  favor  candidates  other  than  those  "  slated  "  by  the 
ward  committee  find  no  effectual  means  except  to  make  vio- 
lent protest,  and,  as  a  result,  a  free  fight  usually  ensues 
between  the  opposing  factions.  At  a  caucus  held  in  1890,  for 
the  purpose  of  nominating  candidates  for  the  Common  Coun« 
cil,  one  of  the  voters  present  was  seen  to  put  a  bunch  of  ballots 
into  the  ballot-box.  Immediately  there  was  an  uproar,  the 
lights  in  the  hall  were  turned  out,  and  a  free  fight  took  place 
in  the  densely-packed  hall.  After  the  disturbance  had  sub- 
sided, the  chairman  declared  the  polls  closed,  and  the  votes 
being  counted,  it  was  found,  of  course,  that  the  "  machine  " 
candidates  had  been  nominated.  Thereupon  a  "bolt"  of  the 
"anti-machine"  faction  took  place.44 

Another  witness,  a  prominent  independent  Democrat,46  drew 
the  following  graphic  picture  of  a  typical  Democratic  caucus 
in  Boston.  The  densely-packed  meeting  is  called  to  order  by 
the  chairman  of  the  ward  committee.  The  first  business  in 
order  being  the  choice  of  a  permanent  chairman,  the  chairman 
of  the  ward  committee  calls  for  nominations  from  the  floor. 
Several  eager  individuals  endeavor  to  get  the  floor;  but  the 

48  The  accounts  which  follow  are  from  notes  taken  by  the  writer  at  the  hearings. 

44  Hearing  before  the  Recess  Committee  on  Caucus  Reform  of  the  Massachu- 
setts Legislature  of  1893,  held  at  the  State  House,  Boston,  Nov.  13,  1893.  Testi- 
mony of  Representative-elect  John  Quinn  of  Ward  12. 

46  Mr.  John  B.  Moran. 


U8  ABUSES  OF  THE  CAUCUS  OR  PRIMARY.    [CHAP.V. 

chair  sees  only  the  one  agreed  upon  beforehand  by  the  ward 
committee,  who  nominates  the  "slate"  chairman.  Turning  a 
deaf  ear  to  the  presentation  of  all  other  names,  the  chair  calls 
for  a  viva  voce  vote  on  the  single  name,  in  the  usual  form,  — 

"All  those  in  favor  of  Mr.  serving  you  as  chairman  will 

say  'aye,'  — those  opposed  will  say  'no.'  '  There  are  a  few 
feeble  "  ayes  "  followed  by  a  deafening  volley  of  "  noes. "  "  The 

'ayes  '  have  it,  and  Mr.  is  elected,"  solemnly  cries  the 

chairman.  At  this  point  a  serious  disturbance  usually  occurs, 
resulting  from  an  attempt  on  the  part  of  those  opposed  to  the 
machine  to  prevent  the  fraudulently-elected  chairman  from 
taking  the  chair.  This,  however,  is  quickly  settled  by  the 
chairman's  ordering  the  police  officers  present  to  remove  the 
obstructors  from  the  hall.48  After  the  same  farce  has  been 
gone  through  with  in  the  election  of  a  secretary,  voting  begins, 
and  in  the  large  wards  lasts  until  long  after  midnight.  The 
"check-lists"  of  registered  voters,  which  the  law  requires  to 
be  used  at  all  caucuses,  being  in  the  hands  of  the  ward  commit- 
tee, repeating  is  carried  on  on  a  large  scale,  from  three  to  four 
hundred  fraudulent  votes  sometimes  being  cast  in  this  way  at 
a  single  caucus.  In  the  midst  of  the  voting  a  disturbance 
frequently  occurs,  some  one  turns  out  the  lights,  and  in  the 
darkness  some  member  of  the  machine  "  stuffs  "  47  the  ballot- 
box.  If,  in  spite  of  all  this,  it  is  found,  on  counting  the  votes, 
that  the  candidate  of  the  machine  is  still  in  the  minority,  he 
is  assigned  enough  additional  votes  by  the  tellers  (who  are 
appointed  by  the  chairman)  to  give  him  the  nomination. 

Another  feature  which  came  out  at  this  invesigation  was  the 
intimidation  of  city  employees.  According  to  the  testimony, 
at  a  Democratic  caucus  in  Ward  21,  in  the  spring  of  1893,  for 
the  purpose  of  choosing  a  ward  and  city  committee  which  was 
to  nominate  the  party  candidate  for  mayor,  174  city  laborers 

*•  In  Boston,  until  recently,  a  fee  of  two  dollars  was  charged  by  the  city  authori- 
ties for  the  use  of  the  ward-rooms  for  the  holding  of  caucuses  ;  and  according  to  a 
city  ordinance,  the  chairman  of  the  ward  committee  being  the  lessee,  the  police  were 
ordered  to  obey  his  directions.  By  the  provisions  of  the  new  caucus  act,  the  city 
is  required  to  furnish  polling  places  in  the  different  wards  at  the  public  expense. 

47  The  practice  known  as  "  stuffing  "  the  ballot-box  consists  in  putting  into  the 
box  a  number  of  ballots  which  have  not  been  legally  cast. 


SECT.  13.]  CAUCUSES  IN  BOSTON. 

participated.  The  "regular  Democratic  ticket  for  city  com- 
mittee" was  printed  on  paper  of  light  red  color,  and  was  dis- 
tributed to  the  voters  by  two  well  paid  city  employees.  The 
bosses  were  there  to  see  that  all  the  city  workmen  voted  the 
colored  ticket  on  pain  of  being  summarily  discharged  from  the 
city  service.  This  flagrant  form  of  intimidation  was  practised, 
to  a  greater  or  less  extent,  in  all  the  wards  of  the  city.48 

Another  witness,  Mr.  E.  P.  Clark,  had  been  a  candidate  for 
the  nomination  for  representative  in  his  ward  in  1893.  The 
rules  of  the  Democratic  City  Committee  provided  that,  at  the 
written  request  of  the  qualified  voters,  a  registering  ballot-box, 
such  as  is  used  at  the  regular  election,  should  be  used  at  the 
caucus.  Mr.  Clark,  desirous  of  a  fair  vote,  accordingly  pre- 
sented to  the  chairman  of  the  ward  committee  such  a  request. 
The  chairman,  however,  coolly  tore  up  the  request,  and 
deposited  the  pieces  in  the  stove,  at  the  same  time  asking  Mr. 
Clark  what  he  proposed  to  do  about  it ;  Mr.  Clark  was  not  able 
to  do  anything  about  it,  the  old-fashioned  open  ballot-box  was 
retained,  and  the  chairman  and  secretary  agreed  upon  by  the 
ward  committee  were  duly  installed.  The  chairman  then 
invited  the  various  contestants  for  the  nomination  "behind 
the  rail,"  presumably  to  see  that  everything  was  conducted 
fairly  and  honestly;  but  upon  Mr.  Clark's  asking  permission 
to  examine  the  inside  of  the  ballot-box  before  the  voting  com- 
menced, he  was  forcibly  ejected  from  the  hall  by  the  police, 
acting  under  orders  from  the  chairman.  Although,  according 
to  impartial  observers,  there  were  not  more  than  300  voters 
present  at  the  caucus,  the  vote  received  by  the  machine  can- 
didate, as  returned  by  the  tellers,  was  510  as  against  234  for 
Mr.  Clark.49 

There  seems  to  be  in  Boston  no  such  use  of  bribery  as 
exists  in  Baltimore,  and  the  interference  of  Federal  office- 
holders is  comparatively  insignificant;  but  municipal  office- 
holders take  an  active  part  in  the  nomination  of  candidates; 
and  it  appears  to  be  plain  that,  as  the  caucuses  are  now  con- 

48  Testimony  of  John  B.  Moran. 

49  Testimony  of  Edward  P.  Clark  at  a  hearing  before  the  Special  Recess  Com- 
mittee, held  at  the  State  House,  Boston,  Nov.  21,  1893. 


120  ABUSES  OF  THE  CAUCUS  OR  PRIMARY.    [CHAP.  V. 

ducted,  it  is  impossible  for  the  Democratic  voters  of  Boston  to 
nominate  the  persons  to  represent  them  that  they  desire.  The 
nomination  can  be  had  only  by  a  previous  arrangement  with 
the  ward  committee.60  The  successful  candidate  therefore 
naturally  feels  himself  responsible  to  the  ward  committee 
rather  than  to  the  voters,  and  will,  in  matters  of  State  legis- 
lation, or  in  the  conduct  of  city  affairs,  obey  the  "machine," 
rather  than  the  wishes  of  the  people.  Where  there  is  little 
or  no  opposition  to  the  "slate"  arranged  by  the  ward  com- 
mittee, that  omnipotent  body  deigns  to  permit  a  fair  cau- 
cus. Just  as  soon,  however,  as  the  success  of  their  "  slate  "  is 
imperilled,  they  resort  to  every  fraudulent  method  for  the 
accomplishment  of  their  purpose.  The  remedy  suggested  by 
most  of  the  witnesses  at  the  hearings  was  the  passage  of  a 
law  requiring  caucuses  to  be  held  under  the  same  regulations 
as  the  Australian  ballot  law  prescribes  for  the  regular 
election. 

As  a  result  of  the  investigation  before  referred  to,  the 
Massachusetts  Legislature,  in  1894,  passed  a  caucus  act,  mak- 
ing the  Australian  system  of  voting  compulsory  in  all  the 
Boston  caucuses.61  This  act  has  had  two  trials,  in  1894  and 
in  1895,  and  those  two  trials  have  proved  conclusively  the 
value  of  such  legislation.  Mr.  John  B.  Newhall,  who  was 
chairman  of  the  committee  which  reported  the  act,  was  pres- 
ent in  1895  at  the  Democratic  caucus  in  Ward  12,  the  pro- 
ceedings of  which  the  year  before  have  already  been  described; 
and  he  told  the  writer  that  he  observed  a  most  decided  im- 
provement. The  act  appears  to  have  had  beneficial  results  in 
other  parts  of  the  city.  That  the  working  of  the  nominating 
machinery  is  still  unsatisfactory,  however,  is  proved  by  the 
renewed  complaint  which  has  arisen  during  the  past  year,  in 
regard  to  the  condition  of  the  caucuses  in  Boston,  particularly 
those  of  the  Democratic  party.  Another  special  recess  com- 

60  It  is  an  interesting  fact  that  a  man  who  "  bolts  "  the  caucus  and  runs  as  an 
independent  candidate,  in  case  he  is  successful  at  the  polls,  is  usually  recognized  by 
the  machine,  and  the  next  year  given  the  regular  "  slate  "  nomination.    Henceforth, 
he  too  is  likely  to  be  a  "  machine  "  man  and  to  look  with  disfavor  upon  "  bolters." 

61  This  act  will  be  described  in  chapter  viii.,  and  the  act  itself,  as  amended  in 
1895,  will  be  found  in  Appendix  G. 


SECT.  14.]     "SNAP"   CAUCUSES  AND  PRIMARIES.  I2i 

mittee  was  appointed  by  the  last  legislature  to  investigate  the 
matter,  and  recommend  such  legislation  as  may  seem  expedi- 
ent. The  report  of  this  committee  will  be  read  with  interest 
by  the  friends  of  caucus  reform. 

14.  "Snap"  Caucuses  and  Primaries.  Besides  the  system  of 
nomination  by  self-perpetuating  clubs  and  committees,  intimi- 
dation, and  fraudulent  practices,  there  is  another  favorite 
device  of  the  professional  politician,  known  as  "  snap  conven- 
tions," or  "snap  caucuses."52  This  practice  consists  in  the 
issue  of  a  call  by  a  State  or  district  committee  for  a  convention, 
and  for  caucuses  or  primaries  to  choose  delegates  to  that  con- 
vention, upon  too  short  notice  to  the  party  voters,  usually 
accompanied  by  a  failure  to  advertise  sufficiently  the  time  and 
place  of  the  primaries.  The  result  is  that  few  but  the  friends 
of  the  "  machine  "  attend  the  primaries,  and  the  latter,  conse- 
quently, have  everything  their  own  way. 

This  trick  is  as  old  as  the  nominating  convention  itself. 
The  following  correspondence  took  place  in  1835,  between  the 
son-in-law  of  Governor  Wolf,  the  "  regular  "  Democratic  candi- 
date for  Governor  of  Pennsylvania,  and  a  supposed  adherent : 

DEAR  SIR,  —  It  has  just  been  ascertained  that  the  Muhlenberg  men 
have  had  second  sets  of  delegates  elected  to  the  4th  of  March  conven- 
tion from  Bucks,  Lycoming  &c.  Their  object  is  to  leave  the  decision  on 
the  admission  of  the  minority  delegates  to  Adams,  Montgomery,  Ches- 
ter, Lebanon,  Dauphin  &c.,  and  thus  let  them  all  in  and  cheat  governor 
Wolf  out  of  the  nomination.  The  only  course  left,  therefore,  for  the 
Democrats  is  to  take  up  their  own  weapons,  dirty  as  they  are,  and  break 
their  heads  with  their  own  club.  All  the  disputed  counties  are  to  stand 
aside  and  leave  the  undisputed  counties  to  settle  the  question.  Now 
the  real  interests  of  the  party  require  that  you  should  at  once  get  up 
a  second  set  of  delegates  from  Adams  and  thus  destroy  the  vote  of 
the  delegates  on  the  admission  question,  —  and  you  are  accordingly 
requested  at  once  to  convene  a  meeting  of  a  few  of  our  friends  (half  a 
dozen  will  do) ,  appoint  a  chairman  and  secretary  and  then  offer  a  reso- 
lution appointing  any  three  men  you  have  confidence  in,  as  delegates 

62  The  two  being  really  parts  of  the  same  device,  for  convenience  they  will  be 
considered  together,  although  the  convention  is  beyond  the  scope  of  the  present 
chapter. 


122  ABUSES  OF  THE  CAUCUS  OR  PRIMARY.    [CHAP.V. 

to  the  democratic  convention  to  meet  on  the  4th  to  represent  Adams 
county,  and  send  them  over.  It  is  taken  for  granted  that  you  will  have 
but  little  trouble  in  making  this  arrangement.  .  .  . 

H.    BUEHLER. 

It  seems,  however,  that  the  writer  of  the  above  epistle,  in 
this  case,  hit  upon  the  wrong  man.  Mr.  Fuller  replied: 

I  cannot  comply  with  your  request  for  two  reasons :  First,  I  cannot, 
upon  reflection,  think  of  six  men  in  the  town  and  county  that  would 
act  in  this  matter;  and  secondly,  I  think  it  politically  and  morally 
dishonest." 

A  modern  instance  of  the  same  practice  was  the  call  issued 
by  the  Republican  committee  of  Albany  County,  New  York, 
in  1880,  in  behalf  of  Mr.  Conkling's  candidate  for  the  presi- 
dential nomination,  —  General  Grant.  They  feared  that  their 
"slated"  delegates  might  fail  of  an  election,  and  therefore 
issued  a  call  on  Friday  for  primaries  to  be  held  for  the  elec- 
tion of  delegates  to  conventions  which  were  to  meet  on  Sat- 
urday. The  "  slated  "  delegates  were,  of  course,  elected.  The 
whole  thing  was  a  deliberate  conspiracy,  extending  throughout 
the  county,  to  thwart  the  wishes  of  the  Republican  voters. 

"In  Bethlehem,"  says  Mr.  George  Walton  Greene,  "the 
notice  was  posted  in  the  evening  for  an  election  to  be  held  on 
the  following  day.  As  it  takes  time  to  get  the  farmers 
together,  a  week's  notice  had  been  customary.  In  New  Scot- 
land, the  call  was  posted  on  Thursday,  for  a  meeting  on 
Saturday,  to  elect  delegates  to  Monday's  convention.  After- 
ward,  as  it  appeared,  the  two  days'  time  seemed  a  dangerous 
concession,  and  so  the  machine  leaders  sent  about  one 
O'Brien  to  pull  down  the  notices  and  post  others  for  an  elec- 
tion on  Friday  instead;  and  the  same  trick  was  played  at 
Berne,  Coegmans,  and  Guilderland.  ...  In  Knox  five  hench- 
men awaited  the  coming  of  the  mail,  on  receipt  of  which,  with 
instructions,  they  immediately  posted  notices,  under  which 
they  at  once  resolved  themselves  into  a  caucus,  electing  three 
out  of  the  five  delegates  to  Albany.  At  Westerloo  no  meet- 

»  Nile*'*  Regitttr,  XLVIII.  114. 


SECT.  14.]     "SNAP"   CAUCUSES  AND  PRIMARIES.  12$ 

ing  was  held,  nor  any  notices  given,  yet  at  the  convention  two 
delegates,  claiming  to  represent  that  place,  were  promptly  on 
hand."54 

A  more  recent  and  notorious  case  of  the  "  snap  caucus  "  was 
preparatory  to  the  Hill  "snap"  convention,  held  in  New  York 
State  on  February  22,  1892.  The  object  was  to  send  to  the 
Democratic  national  convention  a  solid  Hill  delegation,  in 
spite  of  the  fact  that  a  large  majority  of  the  Democratic  voters 
of  the  State  were  undoubtedly  in  favor  of  Mr.  Cleveland. 

The  first  step  of  the  Hill  men  was  to  secure  absolute  control 
of  the  State  committee.  Previous  to  the  assembling  of  the 
State  Convention  of  1891,  it  was  known  that  at  least  nine  out 
of  the  thirty-four  members  of  the  State  committee  were  opposed 
to  Senator  Hill  as  a  candidate  for  the  Presidency.  For  the 
sake  of  harmony  it  was  necessary  to  get  rid  of  this  discordant 
element.  Accordingly,  contesting  delegations  of  Hill  men 
appeared  at  Saratoga  from  the  nine  congressional  districts 
represented  by  anti-Hill  members  on  the  State  committee. 
Although  there  was  not  the  slightest  doubt  that  the  anti-Hill 
delegates  had  been  fairly  elected,  they  were  nevertheless  un- 
seated without  the  slightest  investigation.  By  this  means  a 
State  committee  was  obtained  unanimously  in  favor  of  the 
presidential  aspirations  of  Senator  Hill.56 

On  January  2ist,  1892,  the  Democratic  National  Committee 
issued  its  call  for  a  national  convention  to  be  held  at  Chicago 
on  June  2ist.  On  January  26th,  the  new  Democratic  State 
Committee  of  New  York  called  a  State  convention  to  be  held 
at  Albany  on  February  22d,  for  the  purpose  of  electing  dele- 
gates to  the  national  convention.  Such  an  early  date  was 
entirely  unprecedented,  the  earliest  date  previous  to  1892 
having  been  April  2ist.  Every  newspaper  but  one  in  New 
York  city  protested.  Even  the  World,  a  paper  which  had 
always  been  friendly  to  Senator  Hill,  said: 

The  early  call  is  undoubtedly  unfair  to  the  large  number  of  Dem- 
ocrats who  are  opposed  to  the  candidacy  of  Senator  Hill.  It  puts 

84  North  American  Review,  CXXXVII.  259-60. 

66  Statement  presented  by  the  Delegation  from  the  Democratic  Convention  of  the 
State  of  New  York  held  at  Syracuse,  May  31,  1892,  p.  4. 


124  ABUSES  OF  THE  CAUCUS  OR  PRIMARY.    [CHAP.  V. 

them  at  a  fatal  disadvantage  to  be  called  upon  at  such  short  notice, 
without  organization  or  leadership,  to  meet  the  unexpected  attack  of 
a  powerful  machine  under  the  personal  direction  of  a  consummate 
politician.1* 

Following  the  call  for  the  "snap  convention,"  "snap  prima- 
ries "  were  held  by  the  machine  throughout  the  State.  As 
the  pamphlet  of  the  "  Anti-snappers  "  expresses  it,  "  the  con- 
vention having  been  sprung  upon  the  party,  the  scheme  was 
completed  by  springing  the  caucuses  also. "  67  Notices  were 
posted  on  one  night  for  a  primary  on  the  following  night.  In 
many  cases  no  notice  whatever  was  given  of  the  time  and  place 
of  meeting.  As  a  result  of  this  violation  of  the  rights  of  the 
rank  and  file  of  the  party,  from  most  of  the  towns  and  city 
wards  solid  "  Hill  "  delegations  appeared  at  the  various  district 
conventions.  In  those  cases  where  the  Democratic  voters,  in 
spite  of  such  tactics,  were  able  to  hold  well-attended  caucuses, 
their  delegates  were  refused  admission.  Of  these  high-handed 
proceedings,  the  following  are  examples. 

On  the  afternoon  of  January  26th,  the  very  same  day  that 
the  State  committee  issued  its  call  for  the  "snap  conven- 
tion," a  call  was  published  in  the  Hornellsville  Tribune,  for 
a  primary  of  the  Democratic  voters  of  that  city  to  be  held 
on  the  evening  of  the  following  day,  to  elect  delegates  to  the 
district  convention,  although  the  latter  had  not  as  yet  been 
called.  In  other  words,  only  thirty  hours'  notice  was  given  of 
the  time  and  place  of  holding  the  primary. 

In  Lewis  County,  primaries  were  called  on  a  notice  of  from 
one  to  two  days,  and  in  many  towns  well  known  Democrats 
were  entirely  ignorant  that  the  primaries  were  to  be  held  until 
after  it  was  publicly  announced  that  they  had  taken  place  and 
that  delegates  had  been  chosen.  In  Columbia  County,  the 
notices  required  to  be  given  by  law  were  stuck  up  on  the 
outside  of  barn-doors,  and  the  doors  then  thrown  open  against 
the  wall  so  as  to  hide  the  notices.  In  Cattaraugus,  and  in 
many  other  counties,  notices  for  primaries  to  be  held  at  a  cer- 

*»  New  York  World,  Feb.  7,  1892. 

•7  Statement  of  the  Delegation  from  the  Syracuse  Convention  at  Chicago,  33. 


SECT.  1 5.]    "  PA  CKED  "   CA  UCUSES  AND  PRIMARIES.          1 2 5 

tain  time  and  place  were  posted  and  then  altered,  and  the 
primaries  were  held  at  a  different  time  and  place  from  that 
stated  in  these  notices.68 

In  short,  in  every  part  of  the  State  where  opposition  to  the 
machine  was  feared,  every  conceivable  method  was  resorted  to 
to  prevent  that  opposition  from  being  heard  at  the  primaries. 
The  result  of  the  whole  scheme,  so  carefully  planned,  and  so 
effectively  carried  out,  was  that  Senator  Hill  obtained  his 
solid  delegation.  But  fortunately  this  success  brought  no  real 
advantage.  Such  effective  work  was  done  by  the  opponents 
of  the  machine,  that  Mr.  Hill's  chances  of  securing  the 
presidential  nomination,  if  he  ever  had  any,  were  utterly 
destroyed.69 

The  evil  here  is  perfectly  distinct.  It  is  the  violation  of 
the  rules  and  precedents  of  the  party.  The  remedy  is  more 
difficult;  but  it  would  undoubtedly  be  a  reform  to  require,  by 
law,  every  party  committee  to  publish  a  full  and  exact  notice 
of  the  time  and  place  of  the  meeting  of  the  caucus  or  primary 
a  certain  specified  number  of  days  before  the  meeting  is  to 
take  place. 

15.  "Packed"  Caucuses  and  Primaries.  There  is  one  other 
evil  that  is  frequently  complained  of;  namely,  the  process 
known  as  "packing"  caucuses  or  primaries  in  the  interest  of 
certain  candidates.  For  instance,  the  congressman  represent- 
ing a  certain  district  is  a  candidate  for  renomination.  His 
record  at  Washington  has  been  satisfactory  to  the  voters  of  his 
party,  and  it  is  the  evident  desire  of  a  large  majority  of  them 
that  he  should  be  reflected.  As  there  is  apparently  no  oppo- 
sition to  his  renomination,  many  voters  do  not  attend  the 
primaries,  and  the  result  is  that  some  other  man,  who  has 
been  secretly  at  work  among  his  friends,  "packs"  the  prima- 
ries with  his  followers,  and  secures  a  majority  of  the  dele- 


68  Statement  of  the  Delegation  from  the  Syracuse  Convention  at  Chicago,  34,  35. 

60  The  opponents  of  Mr.  Hill,  the  "  Anti-Snappers  "  as  they  were  called,  held 
an  independent  State  Convention  and  elected  delegates  to  the  National  Conven- 
tion favorable  to  Mr.  Cleveland.  Though  these  delegates  were  not  admitted  to 
the  Convention,  their  influence  with  that  body  was  known  to  be  far  greater  than 
that  of  the  "  regular  "  delegation. 


126  ABUSES  OF  THE  CAUCUS  OR  PRIMARY.    [CHAP.  V. 

gates  to  the  district  convention.  Thus  the  party  has  foisted 
upon  it  a  candidate  whom  it  does  not  want,  and  whom  the 
great  majority  of  the  party  voters,  perhaps,  have  never  heard  of. 

It  is  obvious  that  such  a  thing  could  never  happen  if  the 
party  voters  always  attended  the  primary  meetings,  as  they 
certainly  ought  to  do.  But  even  where  the  voters  do  not,  as  a 
rule,  attend  the  primaries  in  large  numbers,  the  evil  com- 
plained of  can  be  remedied,  to  a  large  extent,  either  by  a  party 
rule  or  by  a  statute  requiring  the  names  of  all  persons  to  be 
voted  for  at  the  caucus  or  primary  to  be  handed  in  to  the  com- 
mittee in  charge,  a  certain  number  of  days  before  the  caucus  is 
to  be  held.  In  this  way  sudden  surprises,  at  least,  can  be 
prevented.  This  provision  is  already  in  force  where  the 
Australian  system  of  voting  has  been  adopted  in  the  manage- 
ment of  caucuses;  but  it  is  evident  that  this  particular  remedy 
for  "packed"  caucuses  and  primaries  can  be  applied  without 
necessarily  adopting  the  other  features  of  the  secret  ballot 
system. 

Another  device  of  the  professional  politician  consists  of 
"packing  "  a  caucus  or  primary  with  a  band  of  hired  "  heelers," 
as  they  are  called,  many  or  all  of  whom  may  not  themselves  be 
voters,  at  least  in  that  particular  district.  These  "heelers" 
fill  up  the  room  where  the  caucus  or  primary  is  to  be  held,  and 
by  their  noisy  demonstrations  and  insulting  language,  tend  to 
drive  away  respectable  voters  of  the  other  side.  This  evil, 
wherever  it  exists,  can  be  easily  remedied  by  suitable  police 
regulations,  similar  to  those  in  use  at  the  regular  elections. 


CHAPTER   VI. 

ABUSES   OF   THE   CONVENTION    SYSTEM. 

1.  The  System  in  General.     The  only  objection  to  the  con- 
vention system  as  a  system,  that  seems  to  me  to  be  worthy 
of  attention,  is  that  the  individual  voter  cannot  express   his 
opinion  in  regard  to  the  different  candidates  for  the  various 
offices  for  which  nominations  are  to  be  made  at  the  conven- 
tion.    To  illustrate :  John  Smith  goes  to  a  caucus  or  primary, 
anxious  to  see  Thomas  Jones  nominated  as  the  party  candidate 
for  county  treasurer,  and,  accordingly,  he  votes  for  delegates 
pledged  to  vote  for  Jones  in  the  convention.     But  he  cannot 
always  assure  himself  that  those  delegates  will  also  vote  for 
his  friend  Brown  for  sheriff,  or  against  an  incompetent  Robin- 
son for  probate  judge.     Thus   the   convention    system   only 
partially   gives   expression   to   the   wishes   of  the   individual 
voter.1 

2.  The  "Crawford  County  System"  as  a  Substitute  for  Conven- 
tions.    To  remedy  the  difficulty  mentioned   in  the  preceding 
section,  there  has  been  devised  the  system  of  primary  elec- 
tion, to  which  reference  has  already  been  made.2    To  select 
candidates,  an  election  is  held  throughout  a  county  or  district, 
the  only  difference  between  it  and  the  regular  legal  election 
being  the  fact  that  it  is  confined  to  the  voters  of  a  single 
political  party.     The  polls  are  open  just  as  on  election  day, 
and  the  person  receiving  the  highest  number  of  votes  in  the 
entire  county  or  district  for  any  particular  office  is  declared  to 
be  the  party  candidate  for  that  office. 

1  Under  our  present  system,  this  difficulty  is  partially  met  by  a  special  vote  of 
the  caucus,  instructing  the  delegates  elected  to  vote  for  certain  designated  persons 
as  candidates  for  the  various  offices. 

8  See  ante,  chapter  ii.  §  3. 


128       ABUSES  OF  THE  CONVENTION  SYSTEM.    [CHAP.  VI. 

For  instance,  the  Republican  county  committee  of  a  certain 
county  decides  that  the  party  candidates  for  certain  offices  shall 
be  nominated  by  the  primary  election  method.  Thereupon 
the  different  aspirants  for  any  particular  nomination  canvass 
the  county  soliciting  votes.  On  the  day  set  by  the  county 
committee  for  the  election,  the  polls  are  open  in  every  elec- 
tion district  of  the  county,  and  the  party  voters  cast  their 
ballots  for  those  among  the  various  aspirants  whom  they  desire 
to  see  made  the  party  candidates  for  the  offices.  The  ballots 
are  then  counted  by  the  election  officers  who  are  appointed  in 
accordance  with  the  party  rules,  and  the  man  who  has  received 
a  plurality  of  all  the  votes  cast  in  the  entire  county  for  any 
particular  office  is  declared  to  be  the  party  candidate  at  the 
approaching  regular  election.  It  is  evident  that  by  this 
system  —  which  is  sometimes  known  as  the  "Crawford  County 
System,"  from  the  Pennsylvania  county  in  which  it  was  first 
used  —  the  nominating  convention  is  entirely  done  away  with, 
the  party  voters  nominating  their  candidates  directly. 

This  system  of  primary  election  is  at  present  in  vogue,  to  a 
greater  or  less  extent,  in  a  number  of  the  States.8  In  most  of 
these  States,  the  party  elections,  as  well  as  the  caucuses  and 
primaries,  are  more  or  less  regulated  by  statute  law ;  but  in  a 
few  the  matter  is  left  entirely  to  the  party  rules.4  In  almost 
all  of  them  the  convention  system  still  appears  to  be  the  gen- 
eral rule,  the  system  of  primary  elections  being  in  operation 
only  occasionally,  or  in  but  a  few  of  the  counties. 

The  system  just  described  has  not  yet  been  in  operation  to 
any  appreciable  extent  in  any  district  larger  than  a  county, 

'  E.  g.  Pennsylvania,  Maryland,  South  Carolina,  Alabama,  Mississippi,  Arkan- 
sas, Tennessee,  Kentucky,  Ohio,  Indiana,  Missouri,  and  California.  In  Maryland, 
the  system  is  in  operation  in  only  three  of  the  twenty-four  counties;  in  Tennessee, 
it  is  occasionally  used  in  nominations  for  congressmen  ;  while  in  Arkansas,  it  is  the 
prevailing  method  of  nomination  except  in  the  case  of  candidates  to  be  voted  for 
by  the  people  of  the  entire  State. 

*  Maryland,  Tennessee,  and  Arkansas  have  no  statutory  provisions  whatever 
upon  the  subject ;  while  in  Alabama,  the  provisions  of  the  law  apply  only  to  pri- 
mary elections  held  in  the  County  of  Mobile.  In  most  of  the  States,  the  legal  pro- 
visions take  the  form  of  special  laws ;  but  in  Ohio  and  Indiana,  the  law  simply 
provides  that  whenever  a  primary  election  is  held,  the  same  laws  which  govern 
regular  elections  shall  apply. 


SECT.  2.]        THE  "CRAWFORD  COUNTY  SYSTEM."  129 

and  never,  except  in  South  Carolina,  in  any  political  division 
larger  than  a  congressional  district,  although  it  obviously 
might  be  applied  to  an  entire  State.  Aside  from  the  trouble 
and  expense,  the  chief  objection  to  the  plan  is  that  it  intro- 
duces another  step  into  our  already  complicated  system,  as 
candidates  to  be  voted  for  at  the  primary  election  will  have  to 
be  nominated  at  "parlor  caucuses"  or  elsewhere,  and  the  real 
nomination  will  thus  be  transferred  from  open  primaries  to 
secret  conclaves.  But  the  same  objection,  in  stronger  form, 
lies  against  the  present  system  of  open  primaries  and  conven- 
tions, the  nominations  in  very  many  cases,  as  we  have  already 
seen,  being  really  made  at  secret  meetings  previously  held. 
At  any  rate,  the  new  plan  makes  it  easier  to  defeat  combina- 
tions; moreover,  in  those  counties  in  Pennsylvania,  South 
Carolina,  and  other  States  where  it  has  been  tried,  it  has,  as 
a  rule,  worked  satisfactorily;  and  it  is  the  only  substitute 
proposed  for  our  present  convention  system  which  has  any 
promise  of  success.5 

It  will  be  observed  that  the  Crawford  County  substitute  for 
nominating  conventions  has  the  same  general  object  as  the 
system  which,  under  the  name  of  the  "  initiative  and  referen- 
dum," is  at  present  attracting  so  much  attention.  Both  the 
convention  and  our  present  system  of  representative  govern- 
ment restrict  the  power  of  the  individual  voter.  It  is  impossi- 
ble to  select  a  delegate  or  a  representative  with  the  assurance 
that  he  will  represent  the  voter  upon  all  the  matters  coming 
before  the  higher  body.  In  both  cases,  however,  this  restric- 
tion is  intentional;  members  both  of  conventions  and  legisla- 
tures, if  properly  chosen,  ought  to  be  better  fitted  to  deal  with 
the  questions  coming  before  them  than  the  average  voter.  If, 
in  either  case,  they  are  mere  puppets  of  political  bosses,  the 
fault  is  not  so  much  with  the  present  system  as  with  the  peo- 
ple who  fail  to  fulfil  their  duty  at  the  primaries  and  at  the 

5  In  California,  according  to  a  writer  in  the  Nation,  the  system  appears  to  have 
led  either  to  local  jealousy  among  the  towns  composing  the  county,  or  else  to  the 
nomination  of  some  objectionable  candidate  who  has  been  able  to  combine  the 
worst  elements  of  the  party,  and  thus  obtain  more  votes  than  any  of  his  more 
respectable  competitors.  Such  a  result  is  made  possible,  of  course,  by  the  fact  of  a 
plurality  decision.  New  York  Nation,  XXXIV.  75. 

9 


1 30       ABUSES  OF  THE  CONVENTION  SYSTEM.     [CHAP.  VI. 

polls.  If  the  referendum  in  legislation  should  prove  successful 
in  the  United  States,  and  be  generally  adopted  here,  then  the 
system  of  primary  election  may  also  gradually  displace  our 
present  system  of  delegate  conventions.6 

3.  Corruption  and  Fraud  in  Conventions.  As  a  rule,  violent  and 
fraudulent  practices  are  confined  to  the  caucuses  and  prima- 
ries; but  they  occasionally  occur  in  conventions.7  When, 
for -any  reason,  the  machine  has  been  unable  to  obtain  the 
election  of  a  sufficiently  large  number  of  its  tools  at  the 
primaries  to  give  it  complete  control  of  the  convention,  it 
turns  its  attention  to  the  latter  assemblage.  The  organization 
of  the  convention  being  necessarily,  to  a  large  degree,  in  the 
hands  of  the  State  or  district  committee,  there  is  an  excellent 
opportunity  for  fraudulent  practices,  if  the  committee  is  willing 
to  lend  itself  to  them.8 

The  state  of  things  which  has  existed  in  Republican  Phila- 
delphia has  already  been  referred  to.  Another  example  of 
fraud  at  conventions  on  a  large  scale  was  furnished  by  the 
Democratic  district  conventions  held  in  New  York  State  in 
1891,  for  the  choice  of  delegates  to  the  State  convention  of 
that  year.9  Duly-elected  delegates  were  unhesitatingly  un- 
seated, and  their  seats  given  to  contesting  delegations  com- 
posed of  faithful  adherents  of  the  machine.  The  convention 
in  Oswego  County  is  a  typical  case.  Immediately  after  the 
convention  was  called  to  order,  the  friends  of  Senator  Hill, 
finding  themselves  in  a  minority,  left  the  hall  (i.  e.,  "bolted  "), 
held  a  convention  of  their  own,  and  elected  three  delegates 
to  the  State  convention.  In  the  mean  time,  the  regular  con- 
vention organized,  and  also  elected  three  delegates.  These 
regular  delegates  went  to  the  State  convention  with  their 

8  There  is,  of  course,  a  distinction  between  voting  for  persons  and  voting  for 
measures;  but  the  arrangement  of  a  party  ticket  is  a  process  requiring  skill  and  a 
faculty  for  adjustment  not  inferior  to  that  required  by  legislation. 

7  A  good  example  of  violent  disorder  without  fraud  was  the  Kentucky  Demo- 
cratic State  Convention  held  in  June,  1895. 

8  See  ante,  chapter  iii.  §  3. 

•  The  State  committee  chosen  at  this  convention  was  the  committee  which  in 
January,  1892,  called  the  famous  "snap"  convention  for  the  choice  of  delegates  to 
the  national  convention  already  referred  to.  See  ante,  chapter  v.  §  14. 


SECT.  3.]    CORRUPTION  AND  FRAUD  IN  CONVENTIONS.   131 

credentials  duly  certified  by  the  officers  of  the  district  conven- 
tion, and  also  by  the  district  and  county  committees.  The 
State  committee,  however,  which  was  controlled  by  the  friends 
of  Mr.  Hill,  in  making  up  the  roll  of  delegates  placed  thereon 
the  "  bolters  "  as  the  regular  delegates,  and  the  regular  dele- 
gates as  contestants,  and  appointed  one  of  the  bolting  dele- 
gates on  the  committee  on  contested  seats,  whose  duty  it  was 
to  pass  upon  the  regular  delegates'  claim  to  seats  in  the  con- 
vention.10 By  this  unscrupulous  action  the  Hill  bolters  secured 
the  advantage  of  prima  facie  recognition,  and  held  the  seats 
against  the  protests  of  the  rightful  delegates.  The  only 
redress  open  to  the  anti-machine  Democrats  was  to  carry  the 
matter,  to  the  National  Convention  of  1892  in  a  published 
statement. 

"The  respectable  Democratic  voters,"  they  said,  "knew 
from  recent  experiences  that  it  was  useless  for  them  to  go 
to  caucuses  and  primaries  and  district  conventions  and  elect 
delegates  who  would  simply  be  insulted  by  a  committee  on 
contested  seats,  if  they  dared  to  assert  the  slightest  indepen- 
dence or  the  slightest  opposition  to  the  candidacy  of  Senator 
Hill.  They  knew  that  in  every  caucus  and  in  every  district 
convention  in  which  they  might  elect  delegates,  no  matter  how 
great  the  majority,  other  men  with  sham  credentials  would 
appear  before  this  February  convention,  would  be  placed  upon 
its  preliminary  roll,  and  would  be  seated  by  the  committee  on 
contested  seats.  As  a  body,  therefore,  the  Democrats  of  the 
state  of  New  York  deliberately  stayed  away  from  the  caucuses 
and  district  conventions  by  which  delegates  were  sent  to  the 
February  convention."11 

In  addition  to  the  fraudulent  unseating  of  delegates,  it  occa- 
sionally happens  that  ballot  stuffing,  bribery  of  delegates,  dis- 
orderly proceedings,  and  the  various  other  forms  of  fraud  and 
violence  which  are  so  common  at  caucuses  and  primaries, 
occur  also  in  conventions.  Here  it  is  possible  to  apply  the 

10  Statement  of  the  Syracuse  Delegates  at  Chicago,  1892,  7.     An  exactly  similar 
case  occurred  at  a  senatorial  convention  held  several  years  ago  at  Cambridge, 
Mass.,  at  which  the  writer  was  present. 

11  Statement  of  the  Syracuse  Delegates  at  Chicago,  1892,  31,  32. 


1 32        ABUSES  OF  THE  CONVENTION  SYSTEM.    [CHAP.  VI. 

same  remedy  as  in  the  case  of  the  primaries,  namely,  the  rigid 
enforcement  of  stringent  penal  statutes. 

4.  "  Snap   Convention!."      This    device    of    the   professional 
politician  has  already  been  described  in  the  preceding  chapter, 
in  connection  with  the  more  important  evil  of  "snap  caucuses," 
with  which  it  is  intimately  connected.     It   consists   in   the 
State  or  district  committee  setting  an  unusually  early  date  for 
the  convention,  necessitating  the  holding  of  the  primaries  on 
too  short  a  notice,  or  at  a  time  inconvenient  to  the  great  mass 
of  the  party  voters.     For  example,  the  famous  "  Snap  Conven- 
tion"   of  1893,   in  New  York,  was  called  in  February,  when 
it  was  difficult  for  the  voters,  particularly  in  the   rural  dis- 
tricts, to  attend,  instead  of  late  in  the  spring,  as  had  been  the 
usual  custom. 

5.  The  State  "Boss"  as  a  Master  of  Conventions.     Many  good 
people  are  very   much   astonished   that   the   men   known   as 
"  bosses  "  are  able  to  control,  as  they  do,  the  State  and  district 
conventions  in  their  respective   States.     But  the  explanation 
of  the  seeming  mystery  is  easy.     The  State  "  boss  "  owes  his 
position,  not   to  the  possession  of  those   intellectual  attain- 
ments which  fit  a  man  to  be  the  natural  leader  of  his  party  in 
the  State,  but  to  the  fact  that  by  means  of  a  certain  native 
capacity  for   shrewd   and   unscrupulous  management,  he   has 
made  himself  the  recognized  chief  of  the  professional  politi- 
cians, —  men  who,   either  from  the  love  of  excitement,   or, 
more  commonly,  for  the  sake  of  private  gain,  make  politics 
their  sole  business. 

The  State  boss,  when  his  party  is  in  power,  is  the  dispenser 
of  the  national  and  State  patronage,  and  it  is  the  possession, 
or  hope  of  possession,  of  the  spoils  of  office  that  keeps  together 
the  machine  of  which  the  boss  is  the  head.  In  every  section 
of  the  State  he  has,  as  his  faithful  henchmen,  the  "bosses  "  of 
the  various  districts  and  wards,  who,  in  turn,  have  their  fol- 
lowers. These  men,  who  either  hold  national  or  State  office, 
or  who  are  living  in  the  hope  of  obtaining  such  as  the  reward 
for  successful  work  in  the  machine's  interest,  quietly  get 
themselves  elected  members  of  the  various  town  and  district 
committees.  This  is  a  comparatively  easy  step  at  the  present 


SECT.  6.]      TWO-THIRDS  RULE  IN  CONVENTIONS.  ^3 

time,  on  account  of  the  unwillingness  of  respectable  men  to 
accept  such  positions,  partly  because  of  the  work  involved,  but 
more  often  for  the  reason  that  acceptance  is  apt  to  brand  a  man 
as  a  "politician."  12 

In  "off  years,"  when  there  are  no  very  important  officers  to 
be  elected,  and  when,  consequently,  there  is  little  interest 
manifested  by  the  voters,  the  professional  politicians  and  their 
friends  are  often  able  to  control  the  primaries  without  resort- 
ing to  questionable  methods,  and  they  avail  themselves  of  the 
opportunity  to  strengthen  their  hold  on  the  party  organization. 
When,  however,  political  excitement  runs  high,  and  they  find 
themselves  outnumbered  at  the  primaries,  they  resort  to  the 
evil  practices  which  have  been  described  in  this  and  the  pre- 
ceding chapter.  Thus,  no  matter  how  much  popular  outcry 
there  may  be  against  the  autocratic  rule  of  "  Boss  Platt "  or 
"Boss  Quay,"  when  the  State  convention  assembles  it  is 
almost  certain  to  be  found  that  these  gentlemen  are  able,  in 
spite  of  public  opinion,  to  dictate  the  action  of  the  meeting. 
Such  is  the  natural  result  of  the  spoils  system,  aided  by  lax 
laws  and  an  inexcusable  neglect  of  the  duties  of  citizenship. 

6.  The  Two-Thirds  Rule  in  National  Conventions.  In  our 
national  conventions,  as  they  are  at  present  conducted,  there 
are  to  be  found  three  evils,  due  not  to  any  defect  in  the  con- 
vention system,  but  to  certain  rules  adopted  by  the  conventions 
themselves.  Two  of  these  evils  are  peculiar  to  Democratic 
national  conventions;  the  third  exists  in  the  conventions  of 
both  parties,  but  is  most  strikingly  illustrated  in  the  Repub- 
lican camp. 

The  first  of  these  evils  arises  from  the  rule  requiring  two- 
thirds  of  the  whole  number  of  votes  in  the  convention  for  the 
nomination  of  any  candidate,  which  has  existed  in  Democratic 
conventions  from  the  very  beginning.  It  is  apparent  that 
with  such  a  requirement  the  nomination  of  the  man  whom  a 
large  majority  of  the  party  desire  may  be  prevented,  and  some 

12  The  present  popular  conception  of  the  meaning  of  the  word  "  politician  "  is 
exceedingly  unfortunate ;  the  reason  for  it  is  of  course  the  fact  that  the  men  who 
have  been  actively  interested  in  politics  have  been  largely  of  the  type  described 
above. 


134        ABUSES  OF  THE  CONVENTION  SYSTEAf.     [CHAP.  VI. 

obscure  "dark  horse"  chosen  as  the  party  standard  bearer.18 
This  has  actually  occurred  in  the  case  of  the  nomination  of 
Polk  in  1844,  for  a  majority  of  the  Democratic  voters  and  of 
the  delegates  were  in  favor  of  the  nomination  of  Van  Buren ; 
and  in  the  Convention  of  1892  it  seemed  not  impossible  that 
the  nomination  of  Mr.  Cleveland  would  be  prevented,  although 
desired  by  an  overwhelming  majority  of  the  rank  and  file  of 
the  Democratic  party. 

7.  Tke  Unit  Rule.     Another  unfortunate  practice  in  national 
conventions  is  the  so-called  "unit  rule,"  by  which  a  majority 
of  each  State  delegation  is  allowed  to  cast  the  entire  vote  to 
which  the  State  is  entitled,  thus  denying  representation  in  the 
convention  to  the  minority  in  any  particular  State,  and  mak- 
ing possible  a  nomination  approved  by  a  minority  of  the  party 
voters  of  the  country.     This  undemocratic  custom,  the  history 
of  which  has  been  given  in  chapter  I.,  was  abandoned  by  the 
Republicans  in  1880;  but  it  still  prevails  in  a  modified  form 
in  the  national  councils  of  the  Democratic  party. 

8.  Delegates  from  States  controlled  by  the  Other  Party.     The 
third  defect  in  our  national  conventions,  as  at  present  con- 
ducted, which  is  common  to  the  two  great  parties,  is  found  in 
the   apportionment  of  delegates.     The  party  voters  in  each 
State  are  entitled  to  twice  as  many  delegates  in  the  conven- 
tion as   their  State  has  electoral  votes.      It  is  obvious  that 
this   method   of  apportionment   entirely  ignores  the  relative 
strength  of  the  party  in  the  different  States.     For  example, 
in  the   Democratic   Convention  of   1892  the   overwhelmingly 
Republican    State   of  Vermont   cast   as   many   votes  as   the 
strongly  Democratic  State  of  Florida.14     In  Republican  con- 
ventions the  irregularities  of  the  present  system  of  apportion- 
ment are  especially  noticeable.     In  the  South  the  Republican 
party  is  so  weak  that  in  some  States  there  is  no  party  organi- 
zation.    Nevertheless,  under  the  present  system,  every  one  of 

J  The  absence  of  such  a  rule  has  not  prevented  the  nomination  of  "dark 
horses  "in  Republican  conventions;  but  the  existence  of  such  a  rule  makes  such 
nominations  more  probable,  and  it  has  certainly  been  more  than  once  the  means  of 
defeating  the  wishes  of  a  majority  of  the  party. 

14  In  1888,  Vermont  had  cast  16,788  votes  for  the  Democratic  presidential  can- 
didate, and  Florida  39,561.  (  World  Almanac  for  1892,  224.) 


SECT.  8.]  DELEGA  TES  FROM  STA  TES.  1 3  5 

the  Southern  States  sends  twice  as  many  delegates  to  the 
national  convention  as  those  States  have  votes  in  their  electoral 
colleges.  For  example,  at  the  Convention  of  1892  South 
Carolina  cast  the  same  number  of  votes,  and  therefore  had  as 
much  weight  in  selecting  the  party  candidates,  as  Kansas, 
although  at  the  preceding  presidential  election  the  Republican 
candidate  received  only  13,736  votes  in  the  former  State  as 
against  182,904  in  the  latter. 

When  a  Republican  President  in  office  is  a  candidate  for 
renomination,  this  evil  is  aggravated  by  the  fact  that  the  dele- 
gations from  these  Southern  "  pocket  boroughs  "  are  made  up 
almost  wholly  of  the  Federal  office-holders  in  those  States, 
who  have  a  personal  interest  in  securing  the  renomination  of 
the  man  to  whom  they  owe  their  positions.15  It  is  interesting, 
in  connection  with  this  subject,  to  note  that  neither  the 
"pocket  borough"  nor  the  "office-holding"  evil  is  new  in 
national  conventions.  Senator  Benton,  in  1848,  after  speak- 
ing of  the  overthrow  of  the  congressional  caucus  as  a  method 
of  nominating  candidates  for  the  Presidency,  said: 

In  place  of  it,  conventions  of  delegates  fresh  from  the  people, 
knowing  their  will  and  doing  it,  were  substituted  and  the  substitute 
worked  well  while  its  letter  and  spirit  were  observed,  but  degeneration 
ensued.  Instead  of  delegates  fresh  from  the  people  knowing  their  will 
and  doing  it,  the  conventions  became  gorged  with  office-holders  and 
office-seekers,  generally  appointed  by  intrigue  and  fraud,  and  wholly 
intent  upon  doing  their  own  will  for  their  own  benefit ;  and  also  largely 
composed  of  delegates  from  states  which  can  give  no  vote  for  the 
person  nominated,  and  of  course  control  the  election  so  far  as  the 
party  was  concerned.18 

In  the  present  condition  of  the  Republican  party  at  the 
South,  in  Presidential  years  a  few  politicians,  either  Federal 
office-holders  or  office-seekers,  call  a  State  convention,  and  get 
themselves  chosen  as  delegates  to  the  national  convention. 

16  The  activity  of  office-holders  in  party  conventions  is  not  confined  to  national 
conventions.  In  Massachusetts  the  Republican  county  conventions,  in  many  cases, 
have  been  controlled  by  office-holders  and  their  friends. 

w  Benton,  Abridgement  of  the  Debates  of  Congress,  VII.  518,  note. 


136       ABUSES  OF  THE  CONVENTION  SYSTEM.    [CHAP.  VI. 

This  is  rendered  easy  by  the  disorganized  state  of  the  party, 
and  the  lack  of  interest  in  political  affairs  due  to  the  suppres- 
sion of  the  colored  vote  at  elections.  The  votes  of  the  dele- 
gations from  many  of  these  "rotten  boroughs"  are,  in  many 
cases,  practically  offered  for  sale  to  the  highest  bidder,  the 
promise  of  government  patronage  being  the  consideration  de- 
manded in  payment.  It  is  rumored  that  sometimes  the  hotel 
bills  of  delegates  have  been  paid,  and  even  more  direct  money 
inducements  offered  to  those  having  no  constituency  at  home 
to  criticise  their  conduct. 

That  this  defect  is  most  strikingly  apparent  in  Republican 
conventions  is  simply  due  to  the  peculiar  situation  of  that 
party  in  the  South.  The  evil,  however,  can  be  easily  remedied 
by  apportioning  the  number  of  delegates,  to  some  extent  at 
least,  with  reference  to  the  vote  cast  in  the  different  States 
for  the  party  candidates  at  the  preceding  Presidential  election. 
This  method  is  already  in  vogue  in  both  parties  in  the  choice 
of  delegates  to  State  conventions,  and  is  manifestly  the  only 
fair  and  equitable  system  of  apportionment.17 

17  So  far  as  the  Republican  party  is  concerned,  the  evil  bids  fair  to  be  remedied 
before  the  meeting  of  the  next  national  convention.  At  a  meeting  of  the  Republi- 
can National  Committee  held  at  Washington  on  June  27,  1892,  Hon.  N.  B.  Scott,  the 
member  of  the  committee  from  West  Virginia,  offered  the  following  resolution  : 

"Resolved,  That  the  call  for  the  next  national  Republican  convention  be  upon  the 
following  basis.  Two  delegates  from  each  State  as  delegates  at  large ;  one  dele- 
gate from  each  Congressional  district  in  the  United  States,  and  an  additional  dele- 
gate for  each  7,000  Republican  votes  cast  in  any  congressional  district  at  the 
Presidential  election  of  1892,  and  a  delegate  for  the  fraction  of  7,000  votes  greater 
than  one  half,  and  two  delegates  from  each  territory  and  the  District  of  Columbia." 
This,  as  has  already  been  shown,  is  the  principle  of  apportionment  already  in 
use  in  the  choice  of  delegates  to  State  conventions.  If  it  is  adopted,  all  of  the 
Northern  States  will  gain  in  the  number  of  delegates  to  which  they  will  be  entitled, 
— the  largest  gain  being  in  the  case  of  New  York,  —  viz. :  54.  On  the  other  hand, 
the  Southern  States  will  lose,  the  greatest  loss  being  in  the  case  of  Georgia,  which 
State  will  have  thirteen  less  delegates  than  at  present. 

There  is  some  doubt  whether  under  the  rules  the  national  committee  has 
authority  to  make  this  radical  change.  Accordingly  a  circular  letter  has  been  sent 
to  leading  members  of  the  party  in  all  parts  of  the  country,  in  order  that  the 
committee  may  ascertain  the  general  sentiment  of  the  party  before  taking  definite 
action. 

Since  the  above  was  written,  the  Republican  Convention  of  1896  has  met  and 
adjourned  without  taking  any  action  whatever  in  regard  to  this  important  matter. 


SECT.  8.]  DELEGATES  FROM  STATES.  137 

The  three  evils  which  have  just  been  described  appear,  on 
the  whole,  to  be  confined  to  national  conventions.  The  "  two- 
thirds  "  rule  seems  to  be  obsolete  in  Democratic  State  con- 
ventions, except  those  of  Tennessee  and  Texas.  The  "unit 
rule  "  is  found  in  Democratic  conventions  in  New  York  State, 
and  is  occasionally  met  with  elsewhere,  but  its  use  is  rare. 
In  regard  to  the  apportionment  of  delegates,  the  vote  for  the 
party  ticket  is,  in  most  States,  taken  at  least  as  a  partial  basis 
in  the  assignment  of  delegates.  The  reason  for  the  absence 
of  these  evils  in  State  conventions  is  probably  to  be  found  in 
the  fact  that  the  latter  are  nearer  to  the  people,  and  less  influ- 
enced by  tradition  and  precedent  than  are  the  national  party 
councils. 


iv. 

REMEDIES   FOR  EXISTING  EVILS. 


CHAPTER   VII. 

GENERAL   REMEDIES. 

1.  Need  of  Reform.     The   preceding   chapters   have   shown 
that   serious   evils  exist  in   the  nomination   of  candidates   for 
elective  office.     The  community  is  aware  of  them,  and  writers 
have  in  the  past  frequently  called  attention  to  particular  phases 
of  the   present  unsatisfactory   state   of  affairs.     In  describing 
particular  evils,  the  writer  in  many  instances   has  pointed  out 
certain  obvious  remedies  that  have  naturally  suggested  them- 
selves.    In  the  present  chapter,  we  shall  consider  some  of  the 
more  important  reforms  which  have  been  proposed  by  writers 
on  political  subjects  during  the  last  few  years.     These  sugges- 
tions, in  most  cases  brought  forward  by  persons  outside  of  the 
political  arena,  naturally  divide  themselves  into   four  groups : 

(1)  Reforms   merely  making   a   change   in   party  machinery; 

(2)  Those  involving  government  interference,  including  in  most 
cases  the  adoption  of  an  entirely  new  system  of  nomination; 

(3)  Those  looking  to  a  modification  in  our  election  machinery; 
and  (4)  Remedies  necessitating  changes  either  in  the  conduct  of 
the  government  or  in  the  attitude  of  the  voters. 

2.  The  Election    or    Appointment    of    a    Permanent    Board  of 
Delegates.     An  ingenious  plan  in  the  line  of  a  radical  change  in 
party   machinery   has  been   proposed  by   Mr.  Sulzberger,1  of 
which  the  main  feature  is  the  election  by  the  party  voters  in 
each  small  district,  of  ten  delegates  for  terms  of  one,  two,  or 
three  years.     These  delegates,  who  are  to  constitute  a  perma- 
nent local  committee,  are  to  be  sworn,  their  meetings  are  to  be 
public,  and  penalties  are  to  be  imposed  on  them  for  fraud  or 

1  See  Penn  Monthly,  XII.  186.  187. 


GENERAL  REMEDIES.  [CHAP.  VII. 

corruption.  In  the  hands  of  these  local  committees  is  to  be 
vested  the  sole  power  of  making  all  nominations.  "  Under  this 
system,"  says  Mr.  Sulzberger,  "  one  tenth  of  the  entire  voting 
population  would  be  continually  engaged  in  supervisory  unsal- 
aried  public  duty."  In  other  words,  he  would  have,  as  he 
expresses  it,  a  "  civil  militia  "  with  the  same  fine  for  neglect  of 
duty  as  is  imposed  in  case  of  jury  duty.  The  author  of  this 
novel  scheme  realizes  the  difficulty  of  getting  the  machinery 
started.  He  suggests  a  choice  of  two  ways  of  accomplishing 
this:  (l)  a  tremendous  effort  on  the  part  of  respectable  voters 
in  each  district  in  the  election  of  the  first  delegates;  or  (2) 
the  appointment  of  the  first  boards  of  delegates  of  each  party 
by  the  courts.  Since  the  first  method  might  result  in  serious 
disturbances,  he  recommends  the  second  as  the  most  feasible. 

Upon  its  face  this  scheme  is  a  legalization  of  the  close  com- 
mittee system,  the  working  of  which,  in  the  case  of  the  Tammany 
organization  in  New  York  city,  is  only  too  well  known  to  the 
citizens  of  that  municipality.  Plainly,  in  those  districts  where 
our  present  system  fails  to  work  satisfactorily,  such  a  scheme 
as  the  one  just  described  would  fail  in  the  accomplishment  of 
its  purpose.  Even  if  it  were  started  satisfactorily,  with  the 
present  indifference  on  the  part  of  the  great  mass  of  the  "  re- 
spectable "  voters,  it  would,  in  the  long  run,  simply  result  in 
greatly  increasing  the  power  of  the  machine  politicians. 

3.  Regulation  of  Nominations  by  Party  Roles.  A  great  deal 
in  the  way  of  remedying  the  evils  of  our  present  caucus  system 
can  be  accomplished  by  the  adoption  and  enforcement  by  the 
party  voters  themselves,  or  by  committees  elected  by  them,  of 
a  few  simple  and  impartial  rules  for  the  government  of  nomina- 
tions. Such  rules  should  provide  for  due  notice  of  the  time 
and  place  of  holding  the  caucuses  and  conventions,  for  orderly 
procedure,  and  especially  for  a  fair  vote  and  an  honest  count 
There  should  also  be  some  provision  for  preventing  members  of 
other  parties  from  participating  in  the  caucuses  and  primary 
meetings.  In  most  cases  such  party  rules  have  preceded  statu- 
tory regulation,  and  not  infrequently,  as  in  the  case  of  Massa- 
chusetts,2 many  of  the  main  features  of  such  rules  have  been 

1  Sttpost,  chapter  ix.  J§  16,  17,  and  Appendix  G. 


SECT.  5-]    REGULATION  OF  NOMINATIONS  BY  LAW.        143 

incorporated  into  subsequent  statutes.  In  those  States  where 
nominations  are  regulated  by  statute  law,  it  is  usually  provided 
that  each  party  may  make  any  rules  not  inconsistent  with  the 
provisions  of  the  law.  The  nature  of  these  party  rules  will  be 
considered  in  detail  in  the  next  chapter.  It  is  to  be  observed, 
however,  that  the  first  step  towards  the  adoption  of  such  rules 
is  the  election  of  upright  men  to  the  party  committee  which 
has  the  power  to  make  them ;  while  the  hope  of  deriving  any 
lasting  benefit  from  them,  when  finally  obtained,  depends,  as 
experience  has  shown,  upon  the  constant  vigilance  of  the  party 
voters. 

4.  The  Subdivision  of  Caucus  Districts.     Another  very  simple 
remedy  within  the  reach  of  the  party  organization  is  a  diminu- 
tion in  the  size  of  the  caucus  or   primary   election   districts. 
This  remedy  for  the  evils  incident  to  over-crowding  has  been 
almost  everywhere  adopted  in  the  case  of  the  regular  elections ; 
but  in  many  cases  it  has  not  as  yet  been  applied  to  the  party 
primaries.3     It  is  perfectly  plain,  however,   that  the   political 
action  of  the  people  in  their  caucuses  and  primary  meetings 
should  be  restricted  to  districts  so  small  that  all  the  party  voters 
of  a  district  can  easily  meet  together.     This  reform  has  been 
suggested  by  Mr.  Whitridge4  and  by  other  writers.6    Its  wis- 
dom and  practicability  are  beyond  all  question.     If  carried  out, 
it  would  undoubtedly  do  away  with  the  densely  packed  ward- 
rooms and  those  disgraceful  outbreaks  of  violence  which  have 
occurred  in  Boston  6  and  elsewhere,  and  also  tend  to  restore  to 
the  city  primary  its  old  town-meeting  character. 

5.  Regulation  of  Nominations  by  Law.    The  interference  of  the 
State  in  the  organization  and  conduct  of  caucuses  and  conven- 
tions has  recently  begun  to  be  recognized  as  a  more  or  less 
effective  remedy  for  existing  evils.     The  people  are  beginning 

8  In  Boston,  for  instance,  while  the  different  wards  have  been  divided  into 
numerous  voting  precincts  for  election  purposes,  the  party  caucuses  for  an  entire 
ward  continue  to  be  held  in  a  single  room,  much  to  the  inconvenience  and  discom- 
fort of  the  voters. 

*  Caucus  System,  24. 

6  See  Article  on  the  "  Trouble  with  the  Caucus,"  New  Englander,  XXXIV. 

483- 

6  See  ante,  chapter  v.  §  13. 


144  GENERAL  REMEDIES.  [CHAP.  VII. 

to  see  that  political  parties  should  be  recognized  as  quasi-public 
organizations,  and  that  the  State  should  regulate,  as  far  as  prac- 
ticable, the  manner  in  which  these  organizations  perform  their 
all  important  work. 

This  remedy  of  legal  control  of  our  nominating  machinery 
has  been  suggested  by  many  writers,7  and  most  of  the  States 
have  passed  laws  upon  the  subject.  The  nature  of  these  laws, 
together  with  a  consideration  of  the  advantages  and  limita- 
tions of  this  important  remedy,  will  be  discussed  at  length  in 
chapter  ix. 

6.  "Nomination  Papers"  as  a  Substitute  for  the  Caucus.  Previ- 
ous to  the  adoption  of  the  Australian  ballot  system  in  this 
country,  the  English  device  of  nomination  papers  was  occasion- 
ally suggested  as  a  substitute  for  the  caucus  system.  In  1868, 
for  instance,  after  the  defeat  of  the  Republican  party  in  Phila- 
delphia on  account  of  unfit  nominations,  a  scheme  was  proposed 
by  the  Union  League  Club  of  that  city,  by  which  any  single 
citizen  should  be  allowed  to  nominate  candidates  to  be  voted 
for  at  the  primaries.8  This  plan,  which  was  a  very  crude  form 
of  the  principle  of  nomination  papers,  was  not  carried  out. 

Since  1888,  however,  most  of  the  States  have  adopted  the 
Australian  official  ballot,  with  provisions  for  nomination  by 
nomination  papers.9  It  has  been  the  universal  experience, 
however,  that  the  candidates  nominated  by  papers  are  rarely 
successful  against  the  regular  party  nominees.10  The  result  is 
that  the  English  method  is  at  present  resorted  to  chiefly  by  the 
minor  parties  (Prohibition,  People's,  Socialist-Labor,  etc.), 
which  do  not  cast  a  sufficient  number  of  votes  to  entitle  them 
under  the  law  to  have  the  names  of  their  caucus  and  convention 

7  For  example,  see  the  article  on  "  The  Regeneration  of  the  Primary,"  N.  Y. 
Nation,  XXXIII.  486;  also  an  article  by  Edward  F.  Hoffman,  in  the  Penn  Monthly, 
XII.  608. 

8  N.  Y.  Nation,  VII.  4,  5. 

9  In  adapting  the  system  to  American  conditions,  caucus  and  convention  nomi- 
nations had,  of  course,  to  be  recognized. 

10  For  example,  see  N.  Y,  Nation,  XXXIII.  486;  also  article  by  Edward  F.  Hoff- 
man, entitled  "  Primary  Elections :  Reform  in  the  Delegate  System  of  Nomina- 
tions," in  Penn  Monthly,  XII.  602.     On  the  other  hand,  in  Boston,  "  independent " 
candidates  for  the  legislature  and  the  common  council  not  infrequently  are  success- 
ful at  the  polls. 


SECT.  7.]    SUBSTITUTION  OF  PRIMARY  ELECTIONS,          I45 

nominees  placed  upon  the  official  ballot.  The  details  of  this 
phase  of  government  interference  will  be  discussed  in  a  later 
chapter. 

7.  The  Substitution  of  Primary  Elections  for  the  System  of  Dele- 
gate Conventions.  Another  remedy,  looking  to  the  abandonment 
of  the  present  convention  system,  has  been  advocated  by  many 
recent  writers.  In  1881,  a  committee  of  the  Young  Men's  Dem- 
ocratic Club  of  New  York  made  a  report  in  which,  in  addition  to 
other  suggestions,  they  earnestly  recommended  that  at  every 
primary  meeting  votes  should  be  cast  directly  for  candidates 
for  the  nomination,  and  not  for  delegates  to  a  nominating  con- 
vention. In  support  of  this  recommendation,  they  cited  the  fact 
that  such  a  scheme  had  worked  satisfactorily  for  ten  years  in 
Richmond,  Virginia,  and  that  in  1876,  in  that  city,  6,200  out  of 
the  7,500  registered  Democratic  voters  actually  voted  at  the 
party  primaries.11  During  the  same  year,  an  article  appeared  in 
the  Penn  Monthly,  by  Mr.  E.  F.  Hoffman,  advocating  very 
strenuously  the  abolition  of  delegate  conventions  except  in  the 
case  of  the  higher  offices.12  Since  1881,  the  substitution  of 
primary  election  for  our  convention  system  has  been  repeatedly 
urged.  The  system  and  the  extent  to  which  it  is  in  operation, 
has  already  been  described  in  the  preceding  chapter.  As 
already  stated,  it  is  doubtful  whether  it  can  be  successfully 
applied  to  districts  larger  than  the  average  county  or  congres- 
sional district,  although  it  is  certainly  deserving  of  the  most 
careful  consideration.  Where  it  has  been  tried,  it  has,  as  a  rule, 
worked  well,13  but  in  the  large  cities  where  reform  is  most 
needed,  it  has  never  been  adopted.  Unless  accompanied  with 
other  reforms,  it  is  doubtful  whether  it  would  bring  about  any 
appreciable  improvement  in  the  character  of  our  nominations. 


"  N.  Y.  Nation,  XXXIII.  486. 

"  Penn  Monthly,  XII.  602. 

13  An  objection  to  the  primary  election  system,  already  mentioned  in  our  dis- 
cussion, is  the  fact  that  under  it  a  small  minority  of  the  party  voters  may  choose 
the  candidate,  which  tends  to  demoralize  the  coherence  of  the  party.  See  Rem- 
sen,  Primary  Elections,  chapter  xii.  It  has  been  suggested,  however,  that  this 
defect  could  be  easily  remedied  by  adopting  the  French  method  of  second 
elections. 

10 


1 46  GENERAL  REMEDIES.  [CHAP.  VII. 

8.  Complete  Legalization  of  Nominating  Machinery.  Another 
reform  which  is  occasionally  suggested  u  involves  the  preceding 
remedy,  but  carries  the  system  of  primary  election  one  step 
further.  According  to  this  scheme  a  preliminary  election,  gov- 
erned entirely  by  State  laws,  is  to  be  held  before  the  regular 
election,  and  to  be  participated  in  by  all  the  legal  voters.  The 
members  of  each  party  are  to  vote  for  persons  to  be  the  candi- 
dates of  their  party  at  the  regular  election.  The  person  in 
each  party  having  the  highest  number  of  votes  for  each  office 
at  this  preliminary  election,  is  then  to  be  declared  that  party's 
candidate.  In  addition  to  the  general  objection  to  the  whole 
system  of  primary  election,  namely,  that  there  will  be  secret 
caucuses  held  to  nominate  candidates  for  the  primary  election, 
thus  simply  introducing  a  needless  complication,  it  is  evident 
that  this  scheme  is  entirely  impracticable.  Under  it  the  mem- 
bers of  one  party,  whenever  there  was  no  contest  for  the  nomina- 
tion in  their  own  ranks,  would  be  sure  to  vote  in  such  a  way  as 
to  cause  the  nomination  of  the  weakest  possible  candidate  by 
the  opposite  party.  The  only  way  of  meeting  this  difficulty 
would  be  to  require  by  law  a  rigid  enrolment  of  the  voters  of 
the  different  parties,  and  to  prevent  from  voting  all  .who  are  not 
avowed  members  of  some  recognized  party,  —  a  procedure 
which  would  result  in  the  complete  disfranchisement,  so  far  as 
the  nomination  is  concerned,  of  the  independent  voters. 

There  is  a  further  objection,  however,  to  the  complete  control 
of  nominating  machinery  by  public  officers  in  that  it  destroys 
the  self-government  of  political  parties.  A  political  party  is  a 
voluntary  association  of  individuals ;  and,  just  as  any  other  asso- 
ciation, it  should  have  the  right,  within  certain  reasonable  limits, 
of  managing  its  own  affairs.  It  is  right  that  the  State  should 
enact  laws  to  insure  the  honest  and  orderly  conduct  of  all 
caucuses  and  primaries,  but  care  should  be  taken  to  leave  as 
much  control  as  possible  in  the  hands  of  the  party  members. 
In  other  words,  the  object  aimed  at  should  be  to  allow  each 

M  N.  Y.  Nation,  VIII.  86  (Union  League  Club  of  Philadelphia:  prize  essay, 
1868) ;  also  The  Elective  Franchise  in  the  United  States,  by  D.  C.  McMillan  (N.  Y. 
1880).  The  scheme  was  also  advanced  at  the  hearings  before  the  Special  Committee 
of  the  Massachusetts  Legislature  on  caucus  reform  in  1893. 


SECT,  to.]       PROPORTIONAL  REPRESENTATION. 

political  party  to  elect  its  officers,  to  nominate  its  candidates, 
and  in  general  to  manage  its  affairs,  so  far  as  experience  has 
shown  such  management  to  be  consistent  with  the  best  interests 
of  the  community.  If  a  party  desires  to  hold  a  primary  election 
in  any  district,  let  it  do  so  subject  to  certain  specific  regulations 
which  the  interests  of  the  community  require.  If  it  prefers  to 
nominate  its  candidates  by  holding  caucuses  for  the  choice  of 
delegates  to  a  convention,  let  it  do  so  subject  to  similar  regula- 
tions. This,  instead  of  the  arbitrary  methods  so  often  suggested, 
appears  to  be  the  common-sense  method  of  dealing  with  a  diffi- 
cult problem. 

9.  Minority    Nominations.     In    1875    Mr.   Henry    T.    Terry, 
formerly  of  Hartford,  Connecticut,  brought  forward  a  plan  by 
which  any  ten   voters   were   to  be   allowed  to  nominate   such 
candidates  as  they  chose,  by  registering  their  names  at  least  two 
weeks  before  the  election  with  some  proper  officer.15     Coupled 
with  this  proposition,  very  similar  in  its  main  features  to   the 
system   of  nomination   papers,   was   an  elaborate  scheme   for 
proportional  representation   in   the   choice  of  public   officers. 
The  object  of  the  plan,  as  stated  by  Mr.  Terry,  was  to  make  it 
possible  for  any  citizen  to  take  an  effective  part  in  the  nomina- 
tion of  candidates  "  without  any  larger  expenditure  of  time  and 
labor  or  any  greater  knowledge  of  politics  than  may  reasonably 
be  expected  from  the  average  busy  man."  16 

Mr.  Terry's  object  is  a  most  worthy  one ;  but,  even  coupled 
with  the  most  elaborate  scheme  of  proportional  representation, 
it  would  be  manifestly  impossible  for  any  independent  nominees, 
however  respectable,  to  be  elected,  unless  there  was  some  pre- 
concerted arrangement  among  the  supporters  of  that  candidate. 
Mr.  Terry,  in  common  with  many  other  writers,  overlooks  the 
fact  that  with  such  an  enormous  number  of  voters,  a  more  or 
less  elaborate  organizing  machinery  is  essential  to  success  at 
the  polls. 

10.  Proportional  Representation.     Another  phase  of  the  same 
remedy  is  the  application  of  proportional  representation  to  the 

16  "  A  Substitute  for  the  Caucus,"  by  Henry  T.  Terry,  in  New  Englander, 
XXXIV.  739. 
"  Ibid.,  743. 


I48  GENERAL  REMEDIES.  [CHAP.  VII. 

regular  elections,  the  object  being  to  insure  the  representation 
of  the  voters  in  the  various  legislative  bodies  in  proportion  to 
the  vote  cast  in  the  State  or  district.  If  this  proposed  change 
in  our  election  machinery  should  result,  as  many  of  its  advocates 
as  well  as  its  opponents  contend,  in  the  destruction  of  all  perma- 
nent party  organization,  the  consequent  political  anarchy  would 
almost  certainly  be  far  worse  than  the  evils  which  we  seek  to 
remedy.  If,  on  the  other  hand,  the  system  were  simply  adopted 
as  a  means  of  determining  in  a  more  equitable  manner  the 
representation  of  the  two  leading  political  parties  in  the  various 
legislative  bodies,  it  would  probably  not  affect  nominations  one 
way  or  the  other. 

In  regard  to  the  application  of  the  principle  of  proportional 
representation  to  the  party  primaries  and  conventions,  the  same 
arguments  apply  as  in  the  case  of  our  present  election  machin- 
ery. When  it  is  possible  that  a  majority  of  one  vote  at  a 
largely  attended  primary  may  decide  that  at  the  county  con- 
vention the  whole  twenty  votes  to  which  that  primary  district 
is  entitled,  shall  be  cast  for  John  Smith  for  a  certain  nomination, 
instead  of  for  Thomas  Robinson,  it  can  hardly  be  denied  that 
there  is  something  to  be  said  in  favor  of  some  change  in  our 
present  methods.17  The  question,  however,  belongs  rather  to 
the  subject  of  election  machinery,  than  to  that  of  nominations. 
If  minority  or  proportional  representation  should  ever  be  adopted 
at  elections,  a  corresponding  change  will  undoubtedly  be  made 
in  our  nominating  machinery,  but  probably  not  before. 

it.  A  Diminution  in  the  Number  of  Elective  Offices.  Com- 
ing now  to  remedies  involving  a  change  in  governmental 
administration,  one  simple  and  obvious  reform  would  be  to 
diminish  the  number  of  elective  officers.  By  diminishing  the 
number  of  officers  to  be  elected  by  the  people,  you  so  far  forth 
simplify  our  elections,  and  hence  our  nominating  machinery. 
This  remedy,  which  has  been  suggested  by  Mr.  Albert  Stickney,18 

17  It  is  to  be  observed  that  this  evil  is  entirely  done  away  with  by  the  system  of 
primary  election  already  referred  to.  On  the  general  subject  of  proportional  repre- 
sentation as  applied  to  primaries,  see  Remsen,  Primary  Elections,  chapter  xvi.,  and 
Appendices  I),  £,  and  F. 

"  A  Trut  Republic  (N.  Y.  1879),  '64- 


SECT.  12.]  CIVIL  SERVICE  REFORM.  !49 

Mr.  F.  W.  Whitridge,19  and  some  others,  is  plainly  a  step  in  the 
reform,  not  only  of  our  nominations,  but  of  our  whole  scheme 
of  government. 

12.  Civil  Service  Reform.  The  intimate  connection  between 
unfit  nominations,  and  the  custom  of  bestowing  public  office  as 
a  reward  for  party  service,  was  long  ago  recognized.  In  March, 
1837,  only  eight  years  after  the  inauguration  of  the  spoils  sys- 
tem by  President  Jackson,  we  find  that  "  Democratic  town 
meetings  "  were  held  in  the  city  and  county  of  Philadelphia  to 
choose  delegates  to  a  convention,  "  for  the  purpose  of  conferring 
and  uniting  in  the  recommendation  of  suitable  persons  to  the 
executive  for  collector  of  the  port  of  Philadelphia  and  other 
offices."  At  this  convention  a  series  of  resolutions  was  adopted, 
from  which  we  learn  that  "  secret  cabals  and  caucuses  of  select 
and  presumptuous  demagogues  "  had  been  held  for  the  purpose 
of  "  pressing  upon  the  executive  a  continuance  in  office  of  the 
old  incumbents  or  the  appointment  of  individuals  not  acceptable 
to  the  people."  The  rank  and  file  of  the  Democratic  party 
being  aroused  upon  the  matter,  calls  were  made  for  primary 
meetings  of  the  party,  "  whereupon  these  adroit  and  wary  ex- 
perimentalists convoked  a  small  portion  of  an  old  committee  of 
superintendence,  without  public  notice,  and  with  private  notice 
to  none  except  to  those  in  office,  or  the  immediate  connections 
and  relations  of  those  in  office,  and  those  who  are  the  most 
eager  for  place,"  at  which  the  calling  of  the  first  caucuses  was 
severely  denounced.  The  resolutions  then  go  on  to  state  that 
this  band  of  office-holders  and  office-seekers  "  have  held  the 
operations  of  the  party  for  many  years  past  under  their  entire 
management.  .  .  .  Tickets  have  been  got  up  and  candidates  nom- 
inated and  forced  upon  the  people,  revolting  to  every  consider- 
ation of  propriety,  policy  and  political  honor."  Thoroughly 
appreciating  that  the  government  patronage  was  the  chief 
strength  of  the  "  machine,"  the  convention  then  proceeded  to 
recommend  to  President  Van  Buren  a  list  of  clean  and  capable 
men  for  all  the  Federal  officers  of  the  city  and  county.20  From 
that  time  to  the  present  the  cause  of  good  government  in  the 
United  States  has  had  to  contend  with  a  class  of  men  to 

19  The  Caucus  System,  24.  20  Nileit  Register,  LII.  41,  42. 


,50  GENERAL  REMEDIES.  [CHAP.  VI L 

whom  the  management  of  nominating  machinery  is  a  means  of 
livelihood.21 

Many  recent  writers  have  suggested  a  reform  in  the  civil  ser- 
vice as  a  most  potent  remedy  for  unfit  nominations.22  After  a 
careful  survey  of  the  entire  field,  one  of  these  writers  concludes 
that  the  present  extremely  unsatisfactory  condition  of  affairs 
is  due,  not  to  our  system  of  nominations  as  a  system,  but  to  the 
way  in  which  the  system  is  allowed  to  be  used ;  the  root  of  the 
whole  evil,  in  his  opinion,  is  to  be  found  in  the  existence  of  a 
class  of  professional  politicians  who  go  into  politics  because  of 
the  chances  it  offers  for  earning  a  livelihood  by  employment  in 
the  government  service.  He  calculates  that  the  national,  State, 
and  local  patronage  in  the  United  States  represents  an  annual 
income  of  $210,000,000,  which  sum  constitutes  the  inducement 
held  out  to  these  persons  to  enter  politics  as  a  profession.28 
Until  that  incentive  is  removed  by  the  universal  application  of 
the  merit  system  in  government  appointments,  it  will  continue 
to  be  exceedingly  difficult  to  insure  good  nominations.  In 
order,  however,  to  complete  the  destruction  of  the  class  of  pro- 
fessional politicians,  the  adoption  of  civil  service  reform  must  be 
accompanied  by  the  enactment  and  enforcement  in  every  State 
of  a  stringent  Corrupt  Practices  Act.  Otherwise,  the  henchmen 
will  demand  and  obtain  from  the  candidate  money  instead  of 
office. 

13.  The  Divorce  of  National  and  State  Politics  from  Municipal 
Affairs.  Another  important  step  in  the  way  of  reform  is  the 
separation  of  national  and  State  politics  from  local  affairs. 
City  and  town  officers  should  be  elected  solely  for  their  fitness 
and  capacity  for  managing  the  affairs  of  the  city  or  town.  In 
the  choice  of  a  president  and  directors  of  a  bank,  or  of  a  railroad 
corporation,  no  one  thinks  of  asking  whether  a  candidate  for 
such  a  position  is  a  Republican  or  a  Democrat.  Why  then 
should  such  a  question  be  asked  in  the  choice  of  the  mayor  or 

n  This  evil,  at  its  worst,  is  to  be  found  in  Baltimore ;  an  account  of  the  con- 
dition of  things  in  that  city  has  already  been  given. 

»  F.  W.  Whitridge,  Caucus  System,  21 ;  Edward  F.  Hoffman,  Ptnn  Monthly 
XII.  602 ;  R.  II.  Dana,  in  Forum,  II.  491. 

M  R.  H.  Dana,  in  Forum,  II.  493. 


SECT.  14.]    GREATER  INTEREST  IN  PUBLIC  AFFAIRS. 

the  aldermen  of  a  city?  A  city  or  a  town  is  nothing  more  nor 
less  than  a  corporation ;  it  is  organized  for  business  purposes ; 
and  it  ought  to  be  conducted  on  business  principles.  To  elect 
a  man  to  be  an  officer  in  such  a  corporation,  because  he  is  a  free 
trader,  is  just  as  absurd  as  it  would  be  to  elect  him  because  he 
is  a  Baptist,  or  because  he  happens  to  have  red  hair.  The 
absurdity  of  the  custom  at  present  so  general  in  the  United 
States,  of  conducting  municipal  elections  on  party  lines,  has 
been  emphatically  pointed  out  by  that  friendly  critic  of  Ameri- 
can institutions,  Mr.  James  Bryce,24  and  it  is  coming  to  be 
realized  more  and  more  by  our  intelligent  citizens.  The  forma- 
tion of  Citizens'  Associations  in  Philadelphia,  Albany,  Cam- 
bridge, Boston,  and  other  cities,  the  object  of  which  is  to  secure 
good  nominations  for  municipal  office,  regardless  of  partisan 
considerations,  is  a  most  hopeful  sign  for  the  future  of  good 
government  in  our  large  cities. 

14.  Greater  Interest  in  Public  Affairs  on  the  Part  of  the  Voters. 
The  only  remedy  which  goes  to  the  root  of  the  whole  matter  is 
the  reform  of  the  voter.  No  system  of  nominations  can  be 
made  to  work  satisfactorily  as  long  as  large  numbers  continue 
to  neglect  their  duties  as  citizens.  The  following  criticism',  by 
Mr.  Joseph  Chamberlain,  is  a  very  accurate  and  impartial  state- 
ment of  the  chief  cause  of  bad  nominations  in  the  United 
States : 

While  they  [the  Americans]  concede  that  many  men  of  education 
refuse  their  share  of  public  duty  and  hold  aloof  from  its  cares  and 
responsibilities,  they  attribute  this  abstention  not  to  the  action  of  the 
caucus,  but  partly  to  the  absorbing  interest  in  material  prosperity  and 
to  the  passion  for  physical  well-being  which  have  always  characterized 
the  American  people.  ...  If  such  a  state  of  things  [i.  e.  the  machine 
nominations  in  American  cities]  is  no  exaggerated  picture  of  American 
local  life,  the  shame  and  disgrace  of  it  rest  not  upon  representative 
institutions  nor  upon  democratic  principles,  but  upon  those  educated 
and  intelligent  persons  who  must  in  this  case  plead  guilty  to  lament- 
able want  of  patriotism  and  flagrant  neglect  of  public  duty.25 

24  American  Commonwealth  (2d  ed.),  I.  610. 

38  The  Caucus  by  Rt.  Hon.  Joseph  Chamberlain,  Fortnightly  Review,  XXX. 
723,  729- 


,52  GENERAL  REMEDIES.  [CHAP.  VII. 

American  writers  and  speakers  express  similar  views.  An 
interesting  example  of  this  is  the  speech  of  Hon.  Adin  Thayer, 
of  Worcester,  in  October,  1 88 1,  before  the  Massachusetts  Club : 

"The  real  danger  at  the  caucus,"  says  Judge  Thayer,  "is  not  from 
the  minority  of  scoundrels  who  attend  but  from  the  majority  of  inert 
though  well  intentioned  men  who  stay  away  and  thus  practically  notify 
the  rascals  that  they  will  meet  with  no  effective  opposition.  .  .  .  When 
the  consciences  and  scholarship  and  true  culture  of  the  nation  make 
their  influence  felt  in  the  primary  meetings,  the  rule  of  the  machine,  as 
well  as  the  influence  of  demagogues  and  bummers  will  depart ;  honest 
men  only  will  be  elected  to  office ;  a  corrupt  civil  service  will  therefore 
be  impossible,  and  greed  for  office  on  the  part  of  those  who  are  dis- 
honest or  incompetent  will  be  simply  ridiculous  and  therefore  harmless. 
.  .  .  This  is  the  only  remedy  —  the  only  panacea.  All  other  expedients 
are  temporary  and  illusive.  The  people  must  rule  intelligently  and  to 
rule  intelligently  requires  the  same  earnestness  in  and  the  same  devo- 
tion to  political  affairs  that  prudent  and  sagacious  men  give  to  the 
business  concerns  of  life."  * 

15.  The  Need  of  Education.  But  how  are  the  voters  to  be 
brought  to  give  greater  attention  to  public  affairs?  Only  by 
hard  and  persistent  agitation.  In  this  educational  and  mission- 
ary work,  there  are  four  forces  which  can  be  of  inestimable  ser- 
vice :  the  press,  the  pulpit,  the  trade-union  and  kindred 
organizations,  and  the  schools.  The  first  three  reach,  each  in 
its  own  way,  those  who  are  voters  to-day ;  the  last  embraces 
within  its  influence  the  voters  who  are  to  be,  and  is  perhaps  the 
most  important  of  the  four.  The  children  of  the  country  are 
still  open  to  instruction,  and  they  should  be  thoroughly  drilled  in 
the  duties  and  responsibilities  of  citizenship.  To  this  end,  in  the 
study  of  civil  government,  which,  fortunately,  is  becoming  com- 
mon in  the  higher  grades  of  the  grammar  as  well  as  in  the  high 
schools,  it  should  be  carefully  pointed  out  to  those  who  are  soon 
to  enter  upon  the  duties  of  citizenship,  that  nominating  machin- 
ery is  a  necessary  part  of  republican  government;  and  that 
honest  caucuses  and  primaries  are  just  as  essential  to  good  gov- 
ernment as  honest  elections.  The  children  should  be  taught 
that  intelligent  voting,  both  in  the  preliminary  as  well  as  in  the 
final  elections,  is  a  duty  which  no  upright  man  can  shirk  If 

*  Boston  Sunday  Herald,  Oct.  9,  1881. 


SECT.  1 6.]  INTELLIGENT  ORGANIZATION.  jjj 

this  lesson  be  thoroughly  taught  and  learned,  there  is  ground 
for  a  hope  that  the  next  generation  will  exhibit  a  strong  and 
healthy  interest  in  public  affairs,  and  thus  furnish  a  striking 
contrast  to  the  present  apathy  and  indifference. 

1 6.  Intelligent  Organization.  The  lack  of  interest  on  the  part 
of  the  voters  to  which  reference  has  just  been  made,  is  perhaps 
to  a  certain  degree  excusable.  Experience  has  shown  that 
good  men  will  run  for  office  if  there  is  a  fair  prospect  of  nomi- 
nation and  election,  without  the  petty  and  ignoble  dickering 
which  unfortunately  is  so  common  in  our  political  campaigns. 
Moreover,  as  shown  by  the  great  popular  upheaval  in  New 
York  in  1894,  men  will  vote  if,  through  the  smoke  of  the 
struggle,  they  can  see  that  their  votes  will  effect  a  change  in 
existing  conditions.  But  when,  as  a  result  of  bad  organization, 
combined  with  past  neglect,  the  nominating  machinery  of  both 
the  leading  political  parties  has  fallen  into  the  absolute  control 
of  unscrupulous  professional  politicians,  and  boss  rule  becomes 
established,  then  the  attendance  of  the  citizen  at  the  primaries 
and  at  the  polls  simply  means,  in  case  his  party  is  successful  in 
ousting  the  other  from  power,  a  change  of  boss,  which  probably 
would  be  no  remedy  at  all  for  existing  evils.  Under  these  cir- 
cumstances, it  is  not  at  all  to  be  wondered  at,  that  the  average 
voter  becomes  utterly  disgusted  with  politics,  and  refuses  any 
longer  to  be  used  as  a  tool  in  a  struggle  between  rival  camps  of 
politicians  bent  on  subserving  their  own  personal  ends. 

The  lesson  of  it  all  is  that  something  more  is  needed  than  a 
mere  interest  in  public  affairs  on  the  part  of  the  voters ;  their 
interest  must  be  intelligently  directed.  To  that  end  men  must 
give  their  time  and  thought  to  counter-organization,  which  is 
the  only  way  to  win  any  lasting  victory  against  the  powerful 
and  highly  organized  machine.  Primaries  and  conventions,  in 
one  form  or  another,  we  must  have  ;  the  thing  to  be  done  is  to 
organize  the  great  mass  of  the  citizens  who  are  interested  in 
having  the  government  carried  on  in  the  best  possible  manner, 
who  in  any  community  always  constitute  a  majority,  and  then 
to  obtain  control  of  the  party  primaries,  and  through  them  of 
the  various  party  committees.  Once  having  got  the  political 
machine  started  aright,  its  subsequent  progress  in  the  right 
direction  can  be  maintained  with  comparative  ease. 


CHAPTER  VIII. 

THE   REMEDY  OF  REGULATION   BY   PARTY   RULES. 

I.  The  Adoption  of  Party  Rules.  As  already  stated,  in  every 
State  and  district  each  political  party  has  State  and  district  com- 
mittees whose  duty  it  is  to  manage  the  affairs  of  the  party  in 
the  State  or  district  as  the  case  may  be.  These  various  commit- 
tees have,  from  time  to  time,  adopted  rules  for  their  own  gov- 
ernment and  for  the  government  of  the  party.  In  most  cases 
these  rules  are  very  simple  and  are  seldom  printed.  In  the 
large  cities,  however,  owing  to  the  exigencies  of  the  case,  the 
city  committees  have  in  some  cases  adopted  very  elaborate 
rules,  which  are  usually  printed  in  pamphlet  form  for  distribu- 
tion among  the  numerous  committee-men  and  officers  of  the 
party  organization.  The  rules  of  the  Tammany  organization 
and  the  County  Democracy  have  already  been  referred  to.  The 
Republican  rules,  however,  have  usually  been  more  elaborate 
than  those  adopted  by  the  Democratic  party,  for  the  reason  that 
they  have  been  more  often  framed  with  special  reference  to  the 
protection  of  the  voter  at  the  primaries  and  conventions.  The 
nature  of  these  rules,  so  far  as  they  are  concerned  with  the  nom- 
ination of  candidates,  may  be  best  seen  in  a  brief  account  of 
those  in  force  in  New  York,  Philadelphia,  and  Boston. 

These  rules  are  usually  adopted  by  the  city  or  county  com- 
mittees. Thus  the  rules  governing  the  Republican  party  in 
New  York  were  framed  by  the  county  committee,1  while  in 

1  Composed  of  delegates  elected  annually  at  the  primaries  from  the  different 
assembly  districts,  the  apportionment  being  regulated  by  the  size  of  the  party  vote. 
In  1887,  the  total  membership  was  601. 


SECT.  2.]  ENROLMENT  OF  VOTERS.  !55 

Boston  the  party  regulations  consist  of  the  rules  of  the  Repub- 
lican city  committee.2  In  Philadelphia,  however,  the  party 
rules  were  adopted  by  a  municipal  convention,  —  a  more 
democratic  method. 

In  regard  to  alteration  of  the  rules,  the  practice  in  the  differ- 
ent cities  differs  widely.  In  Boston,  the  rules  may  be  amended 
at  any  meeting  of  the  committee  by  a  majority  vote  of  the 
whole  committee,  notice  of  the  proposed  change  having  been 
given  at  the  previous  meeting.3  The  New  York  rules  can  be 
amended  only  by  a  two-thirds  vote  of  the  members  present ;  a 
previous  notice  of  at  least  twenty  days  must  be  sent,  together 
with  a  statement  of  the  proposed  change,  to  every  member  of 
the  committee.4  In  the  case  of  the  Philadelphia  rules,  no  alter- 
ation or  amendment  is  possible,  except  by  a  delegate  convention 
chosen  for  that  express  purpose.5 

2.  Enrolment  of  Voters.  In  all  three  of  the  cities  which  we 
have  selected,  the  Republican  rules  provide  for  the  registration, 
or  "  enrolment "  as  it  is  usually  called,  of  the  party  voters. 
The  object  of  such  a  provision  is  to  prevent  members  of  other 
parties  from  taking  part  in  the  nomination  of  Republican  candi- 
dates, —  an  evil  which,  in  the  absence  of  some  such  provision,  is 
almost  sure  to  exist  in  the  large  cities.  Without  such  a  rule, 
whenever  there  is  a  sharp  contest,  the  temptation  is  very  strong 
for  the  supporters  of  each  candidate  to  induce  their  Democratic 
or  Prohibition  friends  to  go  to  the  Republican  primary,  and 
vote  for  their  favorite.  The  result  is  that  whichever  side  is 
victorious,  the  friends  of  the  defeated  candidate  are  sure  to 
raise  the  cry  that  the  victor  secured  his  nomination  by  the  aid 
of  non-Republican  votes.  Such  a  state  of  things  causes  serious 
dissensions  in  the  party,  and  should  be  avoided  by  every  means 
consistent  with  the  preservation  of  the  rights  of  the  bonafide 
party  voter. 

2  Composed  of  five  members  from  each  of  the  twenty-five  wards,  each  ward  being 
entitled  to  one  additional  member  for  each  two  hundred  Republican  votes  over  one 
thousand  cast  at  the  preceding  presidential  election. 

•  Rules  of  the  Republican  City  Committee  (1894),  Rule  71. 

*  Constitution  and  Rules  of  the  County  Committee  (1887,  still  in  force  in  1895), 
Art.  XIX. 

6  Rules  of  the  Union  Republican  Party  (1895),  Rule  '5- 


I56  REGULATION  BY  PARTY  RULES.    [CHAP.  VIII. 

3.  Qualifications  for  Enrolment.  Under  the  New  York  rules, 
the  "  fundamental  test  of  the  right  of  any  person  to  be  enrolled 
shall  be  the  fact  that  he  is  a  qualified  voter  of  the  Assembly 
district,  and  that  he  voted  for  the  Republican  candidates  for 
national  or  State  officers  at  the  preceding  election."  In  case  he 
did  not  vote  at  the  preceding  State  election,  he  must  declare  it 
to  be  "  his  general  intention  to  act  with  the  Republican  party 
at  the  next  ensuing  election,"  and  must  promise  not  to  attend 
during  that  year  the  caucuses  of  any  other  party.6 

In  addition  to  this  "  fundamental "  qualification,  however, 
the  voter,  in  order  to  take  part  in  a  Republican  primary  in  New 
York,  must  be  a  member  of  the  Assembly  District  Association 
of  the  district  in  which  he  lives.  The  difficulty  of  obtaining 
membership  in  one  of  these  associations  has  already  been 
described  in  chapter  v. 

The  provisions  in  the  Philadelphia  rules  7  for  the  enrolment 
or  registration  of  the  party  voters  afford  a  striking  contrast  to 
those  of  New  York.  They  are  simple,  clear,  and  concise,  and 
they  accomplish  the  only  object  to  be  gained  by  party  regis- 
tration, without  in  the  least  impairing  the  opportunity  of  every 
Republican  voter  to  take  part  in  nominating  his  party's  candi- 
dates. The  rules  provide  that  the  registering  officers  shall 
place  upon  the  registration  list  "  the  names  and  residences  of  all 
Republican  voters  known  to  them  residing  in  their  respective 
divisions."8  Republicans  whose  names  are  not  thus  placed 
upon  the  list  by  the  registering  officers,  are  then  given  an 
opportunity  to  register.  In  order  to  be  registered,  the  claimant 
must  prove  to  the  satisfaction  of  a  majority  of  the  registering 
officers  that  he  is  a  legal  voter  of  the  division,  and  that  he 

6  Constitution  and  Rules,  Art.  II. 

7  The  rules  governing  the  Republican  party  in  the  city  of  Philadelphia  are  to  be 
found  in  the  New  Rules  of  the   Union  Republican  Party  of  Philadelphia,  adopted 
in  1893,  and  slightly  revised  in  1894.     The  unit  of  the  nominating  machinery  is  the 
"Division  Association,"  corresponding  to  the  Assembly  District  Associations  in 
New  York.     On  the  first  Tuesday  in  May,  each  division  association  holds  a  regu- 
larly called  meeting   (on  one  week's  notice,  published   in  two  Republican  daily 
papers),  at  which  are  elected  a  president,  secretary,  and  treasurer  who,  with  three 
other  persons  elected  at  the  same  time,  constitute  a  board  of  registering  officers  for 
that  division. 

8  Rules  of  the  Union  Republican  Party,  Rule  3,  Sec.  I. 


SECT.  4-]  MANNER  OF  ENROLMENT. 

voted  the  Republican  ticket  at  the  preceding  national  or  State 
election. 

The  requirements  of  the  Boston  rules  are  very  similar  to 
those  in  force  in  Philadelphia,  except  that  they  are  not  so  strict. 
The  voter's  own  statement  that  he  is  a  Republican,  supported 
by  a  written  statement  to  that  effect,  signed  by  three  enrolled 
Republicans,  entitles  him  to  enrolment,  unless  "  the  Board  of 
Enrolment  [i.  e.  the  ward  committee]  shall  for  cause  otherwise 
vote."  9 

4.  Manner  of  Enrolment.  By  the  New  York  rules,  the 
"  enrolling  officers  and  inspectors  of  election," 10  are  required 
to  meet  on  "the  second  Friday  in  the  month  of  April"  at  a 
time  and  place  designated  by  the  county  committee.  Having 
organized  by  the  choice  of  a  chairman  and  secretary,  they  are 
to  proceed  to  "  enroll  on  the  sheets  provided  for  that  purpose, 
the  residence  and  place  of  business,  if  any,  of  each  person  ac- 
cepted for  enrolment  and  the  date  of  his  enrolment."  n  Three 
copies  of  the  enrolled  list  are  required  to  be  filed  :  one  with  the 
secretary  of  the  enrolling  officers,  one  with  the  secretary  of 
the  assembly  district  committee,  and  the  third  with  the  secre- 
tary of  the  county  committee.  Each  of  these  copies  must  be 
accessible  to  any  enrolled  voter  "  for  inspection  and  challenge." 
One  week  after  the  day  of  enrolment,  the  enrolling  officers  are 
required  to  meet  to  examine  all  challenges  that  may  have  been 
presented.  At  least  two  days'  notice  must  be  given  the  chal- 
lenged party  of  a  hearing  before  the  enrolling  officers.  In  case 
the  latter  decide  by  a  majority  vote  to  strike  his  name  off  the 
roll,  he  has  the  right  to  appeal,  within  five  days,  to  the  Com- 
mittee on  Appeals, 12  whose  decision  is  final. 

From  the  foregoing  provisions  one  would  naturally  infer  that 

9  Organization  and  Rules  of  the  Republican  City   Committee   of  Boston   (1894), 
Rule  24. 

10  These  officers,  who  are  five  in  number,  are  elected  by  the  enrolled  Republi- 
cans of  each  district  at  the  same  time  that  delegates  to  the  county  committee  and 
the  district  officers  are  chosen.    Art.  IV.  of  the  Constitution  and  Rules. 

«  Art.  III. 

11  This  committee  consists  of  fifteen  members,  no  two  of  whom  shall  be  from  the 
same  assembly  district,  and  is  appointed  by  the  president  of  the  county  committee. 
Constitution  and  Rules,  Art.  XII. 


I5g  REGULATION  BY  PARTY  RULES.     [CHAP.  VIII. 

it  is  a  comparatively  simple  task  for  any  Republican  voter  in 
New  York  to  get  his  name  placed  upon  the  enrolled  list  of  his 
district.  An  examination  of  other  articles  of  the  "  Constitu- 
tion," however,  puts  a  new  phase  upon  the  question,  and  readily 
discloses  the  reason  why  the  rules  adopted  at  the  time  of  the  re- 
organization of  the  party  in  1883  have  failed  to  give  satisfaction. 
It  is  provided  that  there  shall  be  monthly  meetings  of  the 
enrolled  Republicans  of  the  various  assembly  districts,  and  that 
at  such  meetings  any  enrolled  Republican  of  the  assembly  dis- 
trict may  propose  in  writing  the  name  of  any  person  duly  quali- 
fied for  enrolment ;  and  that  the  name  of  the  person  so  proposed 
"  shall  be  referred  to  the  Board  of  Enrolling  Officers  to  report 
on  such  proposed  name  at  the  next  regular  meeting  thereafter." 18 
In  case  the  Board  report  the  name,  it  shall  be  placed  upon  the 
enrolled  list  provided  "  a  majority  of  the  Enrolled  Republicans 
of  the  Assembly  District  present  and  voting  shall  so  determine." 
In  case  the  enrolling  officers  fail  to  report  on  any  name  by  the 
second  regular  meeting  after  it  has  been  referred  to  them,  the 
meeting  may  act  upon  the  name  as  if  it  had  been  reported.  It 
is  also  provided  that  "  no  person  shall  be  enrolled  until  after  a 
primary  election  whose  name  shall  have  been  proposed  for 
enrolment  less  than  thirty  days  prior  to  said  election."  The 
object  of  this  latter  provision  is  to  prevent  any  candidate  from 
swelling  the  enrolled  list  with  his  friends,  without  giving  a  fair 
opportunity  for  an  investigation  into  their  qualifications. 

Reference  has  already  been  made  to  the  fact  that  in  Philadel- 
phia the  officers  in  charge  of  the  enrolment  place  upon  the  list 
the  names  of  all  persons  known  by  them  to  be  Republicans.  In 
addition,  they  are  required  to  hold  a  public  session  on  the  Tues- 
day before  each  primary  election,  "  for  the  purpose  of  adding 
the  names  of  all  persons  claiming  the  right  to  vote,"  which  ses- 
sion must  be  publicly  advertised ;  H  and  the  registration  lists  are 
required  to  be  open  to  the  inspection  of  all  registered  Republi- 
can voters.  Finally,  it  is  provided  that  in  case  any  person 
claims  the  right  to  vote  whose  name  does  not  appear  in  the 
registered  list,  or  in  case  the  right  of  any  person  to  vote  whose 
name  does  appear  on  the  list  is  challenged  by  any  Republi- 
»  Art.  XIV.  i«  Rule  3,  Sec.  2. 


SECT.  5.]  DEPRIVATION  OF  ENROLMENT. 

can  voter,  the  election  officers  "  shall  require  the  vouchers  of 
two  well-known  Republican  voters  of  the  division  that  such 
person  is  qualified  under  these  rules."  15 

Under  the  Boston  Republican  rules,  which  in  this  respect  are 
very  similar  to  those  in  force  in  Philadelphia,  it  is  made  the 
duty  of  the  ward  committee  of  each  ward,  "  before  the  fifteenth 
day  of  September  in  each  year  to  prepare  an  enrolled  list  of  all 
known  enrolled  Republican  voters  of  the  ward,  and  from  time 
to  time  thereafter  to  add  to  such  list  the  names  of  all  Repub- 
lican voters  of  the  Ward  which  have  been  previously  omitted."  16 
Any  Republican  voter  whose  name  has  not  been  placed  upon 
the  enrolled  list  by  the  ward  committee  may,  at  least  two  days 
before  the  holding  of  a  caucus,  file  with  the  chairman  of  the 
ward  committee,  "  his  written  declaration  that  he  is  a  Republi- 
can, together  with  a  signed  statement  of  three  enrolled  Repub- 
licans of  the  ward  that  he  is  a  Republican  and  entitled  to  be 
enrolled ;  "  whereupon,  he  "  shall  be  enrolled  unless  the  Board 
of  Enrolment  shall  for  cause  otherwise  vote,"  17  in  which  case  the 
person  making  the  declaration  shall  have  the  right  of  appeal  to 
the  executive  committee,  whose  decision  shall  be  final. 

5.  Deprivation  of  Enrolment  Under  the  New  York  and  Bos- 
ton Republican  rules,  the  privileges  secured  by  enrolment  may 
be  withdrawn.  The  New  York  rules  provide  that  "  at  any  reg- 
ular meeting  of  enrolled  Republicans  of  an  assembly  district, 
charges  may  be  preferred  against  any  enrolled  Republican  who 

15  Rule  3,  Sec.  3. 

16  Organization  and  Rules  of  the  Republican  City  Committee  of  Boston  (1894), 
Rule  23. 

17  Rule  24.  This  might  appear  to  leave  a  loophole  for  arbitrary  action  on  the 
part  of  the  ward  committee.     As  a  matter  of  fact,  however,  the  rule  appears  to 
have  worked  no  injustice.     In  regard  to  the  manner  of  enrolment  the  Rules  of  the 
Republican  City  Committee  of  Cambridge,  which  were  modelled  largely  after  the 
Boston  rules,  contain  a  provision  for  enrolment  on  the  night  of  the  caucus.     The 
rule  is  as  follows :  "  In  case  any  Republican  who  is  a  voter  in  the  ward,  whose 
name  has  been  omitted  from  the  enrolled  list,  attends  a  Republican  caucus  and 
expresses  a  desire  to  vote  therein,  his  name  shall  be  placed  upon  said  list  and  he 
be  allowed  to  vote,  provided  that  such  person  be  adjudged  to  be  a  Republican  in 
politics  by  a  majority  of  the  ward  committee  present  and  shall  sign,  if  requested 
by  such  committee,  a  declaration  to  the  effect  that  he  is  a  Republican  in  politics." 
Rules  of  the  Republican  City  Committee  of  Cambridge  ( 1892),  Rule  32.    For  a  copy  of 
the  Declaration,  see  Appendix  D. 


REGULATION  BY  PARTY  RULES.     [CHAP.  VIII. 

shall  be  claimed  to  be  guilty  of  conduct  unbecoming  a  Repub- 
lican or  of  disorderly  conduct  at  any  meeting." 18  These  charges, 
if  made  in  writing  and  signed  by  an  enrolled  Republican,  are  to 
be  referred  to  the  assembly  district  committee,  who  are  re- 
quired to  give  a  hearing  to  the  accused  party.  The  committee 
are  then  to  report  their  findings  at  the  next  regular  meeting  of 
the  enrolled  Republicans  of  the  district,  the  decision  of  which 
meeting  is  final,  unless  an  appeal  is  made  within  ten  days  to  the 
committee  on  appeals.19 

Under  the  Boston  rules,  any  name  may  be  stricken  from  the 
list  by  a  majority  vote  of  the  ward  committee,  with  the  right 
of  appeal  to  the  executive  committee  of  the  whole  city  com- 
mittee ;  in  addition,  the  name  of  any  person  may  be  stricken 
from  the  list  by  a  two-thirds  vote  of  the  executive  committee, 
upon  satisfactory  evidence  that  he  is  not  a  Republican,  "  oppor- 
tunity for  a  hearing  before  the  full  committee  or  a  sub-commit- 
tee thereof  having  been  given  to  all  persons  interested,  if  a 
hearing  is  requested."20  There  does  not  appear  to  be  any 
provision  in  the  Philadelphia  rules  for  dropping  a  voter's  name 
from  the  enrolled  list.  In  case,  however,  a  person's  vote  is 
challenged,  the  election  officers  must  require  the  vouchers  of 
two  well-known  Republican  voters  of  the  division,  that  such 
person  is  qualified  under  these  rules.21 

6.  Working  of  the  Enrolment  System.  The  object  of  enrol- 
ment, namely,  the  prevention  of  members  of  other  parties  from 
taking  part  in  the  primaries  is  a  most  laudable  one ;  and  where 
the  party  committees  are  composed  of  upright  men,  bent  on 
administering  the  rules  fairly  and  impartially  for  the  party's 
best  interests,  the  enrolment  system  is  a  decided  improvement. 
This  has  been  the  case  in  Boston,  Philadelphia,  and  other 
cities  where  it  has  been  tried.22  On  the  other  hand,  the  estab- 

12  Art.  XV.  »  See  ante,  Sec.  4,  note  12. 

»  Rules  25  and  26.  »  Rule  3,  Sec.  3. 

22  For  example,  the  system  has  worked  very  well  in  the  Republican  caucuses 
in  Cambridge,  Mass.,  where  the  writer  has  had  opportunity  to  see  the  condition 
of  things  before  and  after  its  adoption.  Since  the  adoption  of  the  system,  there  has 
been  little  complaint  of  Democrats  voting  in  Republican  caucuses ;  on  the  other 
hand,  bona  fide  Republican  voters  have  not  been  prevented  from  taking  part  in  the 
primary  meetings. 


SECT.  7.]     CONDUCT  OF  CAUCUSES  AND  PRIMARIES.        jfo 

lishment  of  such  a  system  is  fraught  with  danger.  Owing  to 
the  fact  that  some  one  must  necessarily  decide  upon  the  qualifi- 
cations of  applicants  for  registration,  it  is  evident  that  if  the 
party  organization  falls  into  the  hands  of  unscrupulous  men  the 
enrolment  plan  may,  by  enabling  the  machine  to  perpetuate  its 
power,  lead  to  a  greater  evil  than  the  one  it  seeks  to  avoid. 

In  regard  to  the  New  York  rules,  it  is  evident  that  at  the  time 
of  the  re-organization  of  the  party  in  1883  there  were  added  to 
the  fair  and  liberal  provisions  for  enrolment  contained  in  the 
new  rules,  the  obnoxious  provisions  relative  to  membership  in 
the  assembly  district  associations  or  committees  whose  previous 
operation  had  brought  the  party  into  such  a  disgraceful  condi- 
tion.23 For  such  provisions  there  is  no  excuse  whatever ;  under 
them  the  nominations  of  the  Republican  party  in  New  York 
city,  instead  of  being  in  the  hands  of  the  rank  and  file  of  the 
party,  are  controlled  by  a  few  self-perpetuating  clubs,  and  the 
machine  is  enabled  to  maintain  itself  in  power  in  spite  of  public 
opinion. 

The  remedy  of  enrolment  should  be  used  with  great  caution. 
Some  sort  of  registration  of  the  party  voters  is  necessary ;  but 
the  right  of  each  individual  to  vote  at  his  party  primary,  pro- 
vided he  comply  with  certain  reasonable  qualifications,  should 
be  protected  in  every  possible  way.  The  difficulty  of  making 
the  adjustment  again  illustrates  the  impossibility  of  any  real  re- 
form, unless  honorable  men  occupy  the  positions  of  responsibility 
and  power. 

7.  The  Conduct  of  Caucuses  and  Primaries.  All  three  of  the 
sets  of  rules  which  we  are  considering  contain  more  or  less 
elaborate  provisions  governing  the  conduct  of  the  primary 
meetings.  In  New  York,  a  Republican  voter,  in  addition  to  the 
prima  facie  evidence  of  his  name  being  on  the  list,  must  state 
at  the  time  of  offering  his  vote  that  "  he  is  a  resident  of  the 
Assembly  District  in  which  he  appears  to  vote,  and  that  it  is  his 
present  general  intention  to  act  with  the  Republican  party  at 
the  next  ensuing  election."  M  The  inspectors  are  required  to 
keep  "  poll  lists  "  of  all  persons  voting,  by  checking  the  names 

23  See  ante,  chapter  v.  Sec.  7. 

84  Art.  V.  of  the  Constitution  and  Rules. 


162  REGULATION  BY  PARTY  RULES.     [CHAP.  VIII 

on  the  enrolled  list.  The  polls  must  be  kept  open  from  3  to 
10  o'clock  P.  M.,  and  in  any  district  where  the  number  of 
voters  exceeds  seven  hundred,  on  petition  of  twenty-five 
enrolled  voters  of  the  district,  they  are  to  be  kept  open 
from  8  A.  M.  to  10  P.  M.  In  the  latter  case,  notice  of  the 
time  during  which  the  polls  are  to  be  open  must  be  published 
in  at  least  two  daily  newspapers  for  four  days  previous  to  the 
election. 

It  is  provided  that  all  elections  shall  be  by  ballot,  "  the 
candidates  for  all  offices  to  be  filled  being  voted  for  on  a  single 
ballot,  printed  on  plain  white  paper,  and  without  mark  or 
endorsement  on  the  outside  to  distinguish  it."  This  latter 
provision  is  to  prevent  intimidation  of  voters  in  the  government 
employ;  but  what  object  there  is  in  requiring  the  candidates 
for  all  offices  to  be  voted  for  on  a  single  ballot,  it  is  difficult  to 
see,  unless  it  is  to  encourage  "  machine,"  as  distinguished  from 
independent,  voting. 

In  regard  to  the  counting  or  "  canvassing  "  of  the  ballots,  it 
is  provided  that  the  inspectors  "  shall  proceed  in  the  manner 
required  by  law  for  canvassing  at  state  elections."  They 
are  required  to  announce  the  result  publicly,  to  give  a  certificate 
to  each  candidate  or  delegate  elected,  and  also  to  file  a  certi- 
fied copy  of  the  result  with  the  secretary  of  the  county  com- 
mittee; to  file  with  the  same  officer  the  poll  lists  and  oaths 
taken  by  the  inspectors,  in  accordance  with  the  State  law,  and  to 
retain  the  roll  of  voters  until  the  assembly  district  committee 
shall  have  met  and  organized.  In  addition  to  these  provisions, 
it  is  provided  that  each  faction  shall  be  allowed  to  have  three 
"  watchers,"  both  at  the  enrolment  and  at  the  polls,  "  for  the 
purpose  of  observation  and  challenge  from  the  opening  of  the 
polls  to  the  close  of  the  count." 

The  Philadelphia  regulations  governing  primary  elections  are 
more  elaborate  and  stringent  than  the  New  York  rules  upon 
the  same  subject.  The  provision  in  regard  to  the  calling  of 
primaries  is  .especially  stringent  Thirty  days'  notice  of  all 
primary  elections  must  be  given,  and  postal  cards  containing 
the  notice  of  the  election  "  shall  be  mailed  by  the  President  of 
each  Division  association  to  all  the  Republican  voters  in  said 


SECT.  7.]     CONDUCT  OF  CAUCUSES  AND  PRIMARIES.        163 

division  stating  the  time  and  place  where  such  election  is  to  be 
held."26 

The  election  officers  of  the  primary  elections  consist  of  a 
judge  and  two  inspectors  chosen  by  the  voters  at  the  primaries 
held  in  August  or  September,  and  each  inspector  is  allowed  to 
appoint  a  clerk.  In  addition  to  the  election  officers,  the  presi- 
dent of  the  division  association,  the  members  of  the  division 
executive  committee,  and  all  the  candidates  for  division 
officers  or  delegates  are  allowed  to  be  present  in  the  room 
during  the  election,  and  "oversee  the  manner  of  conducting 
the  election  and  counting  the  votes."  25  The  election  officers 
are  required  to  check  (  \/ )  the  name  of  every  person  who 
votes ;  to  give  to  the  persons  elected  their  certificates  of  elec- 
tion ;  to  make  a  complete  and  correct  return  of  the  number  of 
votes  polled  for  each  candidate;  and  to  deliver  the  same, 
together  with  the  ballots,  the  voting  lists,  and  the  tally  sheets,  to 
the  president  of  the  division  association  on  the  same  evening.27 

So  far  as  the  organization  and  conduct  of  caucuses  or  primary 
meetings  is  concerned,  the  Boston  rules,  previous  to  1894,  dif- 
fered from  party  rules  in  any  other  city,  as  well  as  from  any 
statutory  provisions  that  had  been  adopted  upon  the  subject,28 
in  that  they  applied  the  Australian  ballot  system  to  all  primary 
meetings  of  the  party.  In  this  respect  the  Boston  Republicans 
took  a  long  step  in  the  direction  of  improving  the  character  of 
party  nominations  in  our  large  cities. 

It  is  made  the  duty  of  the  city  committee  to  furnish  official 
ballots  for  the  different  wards,  and  it  is  provided  that  "  the 
names  of  all  candidates  for  positions  duly  presented  on  Nomi- 
nation Papers  as  herein  specified  and  none  others  shall  be 


25  Rule  4,  Sec.  r. 

26  Rule  4,  Sec.  2.  v  Ibid.,  Sec.  6  and  7. 

28  These  rules  have  been  "very  largely  superseded  by  the  Massachusetts  Caucus 
Act  of  1894,  which  makes  the  Australian  system  compulsory  in  the  caucuses  of  both 
the  Republican  and  Democratic  parties  in  the  city  of  Boston.  This  act,  which  was 
very  largely  based  on  the  Republican  rules  described  above,  will  be  discussed  in 
the  following  chapter.  A  summary  of  the  rules  has  been  given,  however,  in  order 
to  show  what  can  be  done  by  the  way  of  party  rules,  in  the  absence  of  statutory 
provisions.  In  the  case  of  the  Republican  party  in  Boston,  the  remedy  of  party 
rules  had  done  its  work  before  that  of  legal  interference  had  been  applied. 


1 64  REGULA TION  BY  PARTY  RULES.    [CHAP.  VIII. 

printed  on  the  official  ballots."  M  Nomination  papers,80  placing 
candidates  in  nomination,  must  contain  the  signatures  of  at  least 
five  enrolled  Republican  voters  of  the  ward,  and  must  be  filed 
with  the  secretary  of  the  city  committee  at  least  one  week 
before  the  date  of  the  caucus.81  For  the  convenience  of  the 
voter,  there  is  one  very  proper  provision,  that  "  in  connection 
with  a  group  of  names  of  persons  proposed  as  delegates  to  a 
convention,  any  such  statement  may  be  made  as  that  they  are 
favorable  to  or  are  pledged  to  support  or  oppose  any  person  or 
persons  for  an  office  or  offices  to  be  filled,  or  are  for  or  against 
any  public  measure,  or  are  uncommitted  .  .  .  and  such  state- 
ments shall  be  printed  upon  the  ballots."  ^  In  case  of  the  non- 
filing  of  nomination  papers  in  any  ward,  the  ward  committee, 
and  in  certain  cases  the  president  and  secretary  of  the  city  com- 
mittee, are  authorized  to  file  nominations.33  The  other  provisions 
in  regard  to  nomination  papers,  the  form  of  the  ballots,  and  the 
manner  of  voting  are  the  same  as  those  provided  for  regular 
State  and  city  elections  in  the  Australian  ballot  law  of  Massa- 
chusetts and  of  other  States. 

In  addition  to  the  provisions  in  regard  to  nomination  papers, 
and  the  other  secret  Australian  ballot  provisions,  there  are  sev- 
eral rules  prescribing  the  organization  and  conduct  of  the 
caucuses  themselves.  For  all  regular  caucuses,  of  which  there 
are  three  each  year,  at  least  two  weeks'  notice  must  be  given  by 
the  city  committee.34  The  conduct  of  the  caucus  itself — the 
distribution  and  counting  of  the  ballots,  etc. —  is  in  the  hands  of 
the  ward  committee,  and  it  is  provided  that "  no  other  person 
than  the  members  of  the  Ward  Committee  and  duly  elected  or 
appointed  officials,  shall,  except  by  the  consent  of  the  chairman, 
approved  by  a  majority  of  said  committee,  be  allowed  behind 
the  rail,  and  then  only  for  the  purpose  of  rendering  such  assist- 
ance as  the  ward  committee  may  direct."  ** 

39  Organization  and  Rules  (1893),  Rule  31.  Specimen  ballots  will  be  found  in 
Appendix  B. 

*°  Blank  nomination  papers  are  required  to  be  furnished  by  the  city  committee 
(Rule  30). 

n  Rules  32  and  37.  **  Rule  36.  "  Rules  40  and  41. 

*  Rule  59. 

M  This  giving  control  of  the  conduct  of  the  caucus  into  the  hands  of  the  ward 


SECT.  8.]  CASES  OF  DISPUTED   CHOICE.  ^5 

Furthermore,  the  exact  order  of  procedure  of  the  caucus  is 
explicitly  laid  down  in  the  rules.  The  caucus  must  be  called  to 
order  by  the  chairman,  or  by  some  other  officer  or  member  of 
the  ward  committee.  The  first  business  in  order  is  the  choice 
of  a  chairman,  which,  at  the  written  request  of  five  enrolled 
Republicans,  must  be  by  ballot  After  the  choice  of  a  clerk,  and 
"  the  transacting  of  any  other  necessary  preliminary  business 
that  may  properly  come  before  the  meeting,"  the  balloting  is  to 
begin,  and  must  be  allowed  to  go  on  uninterruptedly  until  8.30 
o'clock,  when  the  polls  shall  close,  unless  the  caucus  shall  vote 
to  keep  them  open  until  a  later  hour.  No  person  is  to  be 
allowed  to  vote  unless  his  name  appears  upon  the  enrolled  list, 
and  no  ballots  except  the  official  ballots  of  the  city  committee 
are  to  be  received.  At  the  close  of  the  polls,  the  ballots  must 
be  counted  "  in  full  view  of  the  voters  present  and  the  result 
declared."  The  clerk  is  then  required  to  seal  up  the  ballots, 
together  with  the  check  lists  of  the  voters,  and  all  other  papers 
relating  to  the  caucus,  and  deliver  them,  within  twenty-four  hours, 
to  the  secretary  of  the  city  committee,  "  by  whom  they  shall  be 
preserved  for  three  months  and  who  shall  produce  the  same  it 
called  for  by  any  court  of  justice,  tribunal  or  convention  having 
jurisdiction  of  the  same."36 

8.  Cases  of  Disputed  Choice.  In  cases  of  dispute  in  regard  to 
the  result  of  the  primary  meetings,  the  Boston  rules  provide 
that,  "  upon  the  written  request  of  ten  enrolled  Republican 
voters  of  the  Ward  in  which  a  Caucus  is  held,  made  within 
three  days  after  any  Caucus,  the  Executive  Committee  of  the 
Republican  City  Committee  shall  recount  said  ballots,"  37  a  pro- 
committee  is  a  dangerous  experiment,  as  is  shown  by  the  experience  of  the  Demo- 
cratic caucuses  under  the  old  system.  This  difficulty  was  met,  in  the  Act  of  1894,  by 
providing  that  the  caucus  officers  should  be  elected  by  the  party  voters  of  the  ward. 

86  Rules  65  to  75  inclusive. 

87  Organization  and  Rules  (1893),  Rule  75.     In  the  case  of  contested  elections  to 
ward  committees,  the  contestants  are  required  to  file  with  the  secretary  of  the  city 
committee,  on  or  before  January  1st,  "  a  petition  setting  forth  all  alleged  irregular- 
ities by  reason  of  which  the  contest  is  claimed  ;  and  the  secretary  shall,  within  one 
week  thereafter,  serve  a  copy  of  such  petition  upon  the  party  whose  election  is  to 
be  contested,"  a  hearing  is  then  given  by  the  whole  city  committee  to  both  parties, 
the  contestants  being  obliged  to  confine  themselves  to  the  allegations  contained  in 
the  petition.     Rules  90  and  91.     By  an  act  of  1896,  the  whole  matter  of  recounting 


1 66  REGULATION  BY  PARTY  RULES.    [CHAP.  VIII. 

vision  which  is  apparently  not  to  be  found  in  any  other  party 
rules. 

The  Philadelphia  rules  contain  a  very  elaborate  provision  for 
settling  disputes  as  to  the  election  of  delegates  to  conventions. 
In  such  a  case  the  contestant  must  the  same  evening  file,  with 
the  president  of  the  division  association,  a  declaration  signed 
by  himself  and  two  other  Republican  voters,  stating  the  facts 
of  the  case.  The  president  must  then  summon  the  secretary  of 
the  division  and  the  three  registering  officers  who,  together 
with  the  president,  are  to  constitute  a  tribunal  to  determine  the 
matter  in  dispute.  The  hearing  must  be  had,  and  the  decision 
rendered,  the  same  evening  as  that  on  which  the  election  oc- 
curs. Before  hearing  the  case,  the  members  of  the  tribunal 
must  separately  take  oath  "  to  decide  the  case  on  its  merits; 
and  to  award  the  certificate  to  the  delegate  receiving  the  high- 
est number  of  legal  votes." w  A  sworn  certificate  is  then 
affixed  to  the  credential  of  the  delegate  in  whose  favor  the  con- 
test is  decided.  This  admirable  provision  entirely  does  away 
with  the  delay  and  annoyance  of  contesting  delegations  at  the 
various  conventions.39 

9.  The  Call  of  Conventions.  The  Boston  rules  contain  no  pro- 
vision in  regard  to  the  calling  of  conventions.  The  Philadelphia 
rules  simply  require  the  campaign  committee  to  give  at  least 
one  week's  notice  of  the  time  of  holding  all  conventions,  to  be 
published  for  three  consecutive  days  in  at  least  three  Repub- 
lican newspapers.  *°  In  the  New  York  rules,  in  order  to  guard 
against  the  evil  of  "snap  caucuses,"  it  is  provided  that  the 
county  committee  "  shall,  whenever  a  Republican  State  conven- 
tion or  other  Republican  convention  shall  be  duly  called,  fifteen 
days  before  the  date  of  meeting  of  such  convention,  issue  a  call 

ballots  in  the  Boston  caucuses  has  been  given  by  statute  into  the  hands  of  the  Board 
of  Election  Commissioners. 

»  Rule  4,  Sec.  8. 

89  In  order  to  prevent  the  ward  executive  committee  from  "selling  out"  their 
party  nominees,  or  in  any  way  acting  contrary  to  their  interests,  it  is  provided  that 
"  all  nominees  of  the  party  for  ward  officers  shall  be  ex-officio  members  of  their 
Ward  Executive  committee,  for  the  election  at  which  they  are  nominees  and  for 
two  weeks  thereafter  and  be  entitled  to  vote  therein."  Rule  5,  Sec.  4.  A  similar 
provision  exists  in  the  case  of  the  city  campaign  committee,  Rule  6,  Sec.  i. 

40  Rule  6,  Sec.  4.    The  same  provision  applies  to  primaries. 


SECT.  IT.]  PROCEDURE  OF  CONVENTIONS.  167 

to  be  published  in  two  Republican  daily  newspapers  for  four 
days,  designating  the  times  and  places  of  holding  meetings  in 
the  several  assembly  districts  for  the  election  of  delegates  to  any 
such  convention."  41 

10.  Apportionment  of  Delegates.     Under  the  New  York  rules, 
except  in  the  case  of  the  State  convention,  the  county  com- 
mittee is  given  the  power  of  fixing  the  number  of  delegates  which 
each  assembly  district  is  entitled  to  elect  to  any  convention. 
The  committee,  however,  is  required  to  assign  to  each  district  a 
number  of  delegates  "  proportional  to  the  Republican  vote  cast 
in  such  district  at  the  last  preceding  State  election."    Within 
one  month  after  a  presidential  election,  it  is  made  the  duty  of 
the  county  committee  to  re-apportion    the    number   of  dele- 
gates  among  the  various   assembly  districts,   the   basis  being 
one  delegate  for  every  150  votes,  or  majority  fraction  thereof, 
cast  for  the  Republican  electors  in  the  district 42 

In  Philadelphia,  the  whole  matter  of  apportionment  is  dis- 
posed of  by  the  simple  provision  that  all  conventions  shall 
consist  of  one  delegate  from  each  division,43  while  the  Boston 
rules  provide  that  "  all  calls  for  Municipal  and  Aldermanic  Con- 
ventions44 shall  be  based  on  the  Presidential  vote  next  preced- 
ing such  call,"46  each  ward  being  entitled  to  one  delegate  at 
large  and  one  additional  delegate  for  every  hundred  votes  cast 
for  the  Republican  electors. 

11.  Procedure  of  Conventions.     It  will  be  remembered  that  the 
difficulties  in  the  way  of  good  nominations  in  Philadelphia  have 
been  encountered  not  so  much  in  the  primaries  as  in  the  con- 
ventions.    Accordingly,  the  new  rules  contain  very  careful  and 
stringent  provisions  for  securing  honesty  and  fair  play  at  all 
delegate  conventions,  and  in  this  respect  the  Philadelphia  rules 
are  unique.     In  order  to  prevent  the  fraudulent  unseating  of 
duly  elected  delegates,  the  following  rule  has  been  adopted : 

"  All  conventions  shall  consist  of  a  delegate  from  each  Division. 
The  person  presenting  himself  with  the  certificate,  as  provided  in  sec- 

«  Art.  X.  "  Constitution  and  Rules,  Art.  X. 

48  Rule  7,  Sec.  i. 

**  In  Massachusetts  all  other  conventions  are  called  by  the  State  committee. 
46  Rules  (1894),  Rule  49. 


REGULATION  BY  PARTY  RULES.    [CHAP.  VIII. 

tions  7  and  8,  Rule  IV.,  shall  be  admitted  as  a  member  of  the  respec- 
tive conventions,  and  no  officers  of  any  convention  or  any  member 
thereof  shall  question  the  right  of  said  person  to  sit  in  the  convention ; 
all  motions  raising  such  a  question  are  expressly  forbidden  and  shall 
be  ruled  out  of  order."  ** 

It  is  obvious  that  if  this  provision  is  enforced,  it  will  be  no 
longer  possible  to  say  that  "  the  man  who  succeeds  in  getting 
the  temporary  chairman  always  gets  the  nomination."  47  It  is 
further  provided  that  the  officers  of  the  convention  shall  be 
nominated  in  open  convention,  and  elected  by  a  viva  voce  vote 
upon  roll-call. 

The  manner  of  voting  in  conventions  is  very  elaborately  pro- 
vided for  as  follows : 

The  voting  shall  be  by  Wards,  commencing  with  the  first  and  pro- 
ceeding in  numerical  order.  As  each  Ward  is  called  by  the  Secretary, 
the  Chairman  of  the  Ward  Delegation,  previously  selected,  shall  rise  in 
his  place  and  announce  in  a  distinct  tone  of  voice  the  names  of  the 
candidates,  with  the  number  of  votes  cast  for  each  by  his  delegation 
(each  delegate  being  entitled  to  one  vote),  which  shall  be  recorded  by 
the  Tellers.  Should  there  be  any  dispute  in  the  Ward  Delegation  as  to 
the  correctness  of  the  vote  as  announced  by  the  Ward  Chairman,  the 
Secretary  shall  call  the  names  of  the  Ward  Delegation,  commencing 
with  the  first  division  and  the  Tellers  shall  record  the  vote  as  it  is  then 
cast.  The  nominee  must  have  a  majority  of  the  votes  cast.  If  there  be 
no  nomination  on  the  first  ballot  the  roll  of  Wards  shall  be  again  called 
and  repeated  until  a  nomination  is  made.  ...  All  candidates  receiving 
less  than  three  (3)  votes  on  the  third  ballot  must  be  dropped  ;  and  upon 
all  subsequent  ballots,  the  name  of  the  candidate  receiving  the  lowest 
number  of  votes  shall  be  dropped  and  not  be  again  balloted  for.48 

This  provision  for  an  open  ballot  at  nominating  conventions 
is  an  eminently  proper  one.  There  has  long  been  a  controversy 
as  to  the  comparative  merits  of  an  open  and  a  secret  ballot,  both 
in  elections  and  in  nominations.  A  careful  consideration  of  the 
subject  seems  to  lead  to  a  solution  which  is  in  the  form  of  a 
compromise  between  these  two  conflicting  views,  viz. :  that  at 

49  Rule  7,  Sec.  i.  «  See  ante,  chapter  v.  §  n. 

48  Rule  7,  Sees,  i  and  2. 


SECT.  12.]  THE   USE   OF  PROXIES.  169 

elections  there  should  be  a  secret  ballot  in  order  that  the  indi- 
vidual voter  may  be  protected  against  all  forms  of  intimidation, 
while  on  the  other  hand,  in  legislative  halls  voting  should 
be  open  in  order  that  the  people  may  know  exactly  how 
their  representatives  act  upon  matters  of  public  policy.  The 
same  distinction  between  the  voter  at  a  primary  and  a  delegate, 
between  the  master  and  his  servant,  applies  to  nominations.  At 
the  primaries,  just  as  at  elections,  there  should  be  a  secret  ballot ; 
while  in  conventions  of  delegates,  the  balloting  should  be  open, 
in  order  that  the  delegates  may  be  held  responsible  to  their 
constituents. 

The  only  provision  in  the  New  York  rules  relative  to  the  pro- 
cedure of  conventions  requires  that  "  in  every  county  nom- 
inating convention,  in  taking  the  vote  upon  a  nomination,  the 
roll  shall  be  called  and  each  member  shall  rise  in  his  place  and 
announce  the  name  of  his  candidate."  49 

In  regard  to  this  subject  of  organization  and  conduct  of 
nominating  conventions,  the  Boston  rules  contain  no  provision 
at  all,  except  the  insignificant  one  that  "  in  case  of  any  vacancy 
in  a  delegation  to  a  convention,  it  shall  be  filled  by  vote  of  the 
remaining  members  of  the  delegation."  ®  The  reason  for  the 
absence  of  such  provisions,  which  constitute  so  prominent  a 
feature  of  the  Philadelphia  rules,  is  that  in  Boston,  and  in  Massa- 
chusetts generally,  the  nominating  conventions  have,  as  a  rule, 
been  fairly  and  honestly  conducted.  Whatever  fraud  or  vio- 
lence has  occurred  has  been  confined  to  the  caucuses.  Never- 
theless, judging  by  some  things  that  have  happened,  some  such 
rule  as  has  been  described  for  the  publicity  of  voting  at  conven- 
tions, might  with  advantage  be  adopted  even  in  Massachusetts. 

12.  The  Use  of  Proxies.  Under  the  convention  system,  it  is 
the  almost  invariable  custom  to  allow  a  person  chosen  as  dele- 
gate to  a  convention  to  transfer  his  credential  to  some  one  else ; 
and  in  fact,  in  many  cases,  credentials  pass  from  hand  to  hand 
like  bank  checks,  —a  practice  which  makes  it  easy  for  a  few 
designing  individuals  to  secure  control  of  any  particular  conven- 
tion. The  Philadelphia  rules  are  the  only  ones  which  take 
notice  of  this  evil.  They  provide  that  "  no  substitute  shall  be 
49  Art.  XVIII.  M  Rules  (1894),  Rule  62. 


I7o  REGULATION  BY  PARTY  RULES.    [CHAP.  VIII. 

allowed  under  any  circumstances  to  appear  in  any  convention," 61 
a  radical  departure  from  the  usual  custom.  The  main  object  of 
the  provision  is  to  prevent  scheming  politicians  from  causing 
the  choice  at  primaries  of  most  respectable  citizens  as  dele- 
gates knowing  that  they  will  not  attend  the  convention,  and 
then  securing  their  credentials  to  be  used  for  their  own  selfish 
ends.  This  is  beyond  a  doubt  a  step  in  the  right  direction. 

13.  Status  of  Office-holders.  Reference  has  already  been  made 
to  the  activity  of  office-holders  in  primaries  and  conventions. 
In  the  New  York  Republican  rules,  there  is  a  provision  that  no 
person  shall  be  eligible  as  a  member  of  any  party  committee,  or 
a  delegate  to  any  nominating  convention,  or  act  as  an  enrolling 
officer  or  inspector  of  elections,  "  who  directly  or  indirectly 
holds  any  political  office  or  emolument  other  than  that  of 
Notary  Public,  Commissioner  of  Deeds,  Inspector  of  Elections 
or  Poll  Clerk  under  Democratic  authority  .  .  .  and  all  offices 
the  power  of  appointment  of  which  is  invested  in  any  Democrat, 
or  any  board  or  body  whose  members  are  appointed  by  any 
Democrat,  shall  be  considered  as  held  under  Democratic 
authority."  62  If  this  provision  applied  to  Republican  as  well 
as  to  Democratic  office-holders,  it  would  be  a  long  step  in  the 
direction  of  the  divorcement  of  the  spoils  system  from  its  con- 
nection with  the  nominating  machinery.  As  it  is,  however, 
instead  of  being  a  step  towards  civil  service  reform,  it  is  de- 
signed as  a  direct  attack  upon  that  principle,  for  it  declares  that 
any  Republican  who  allows  himself  to  be  retained  in  office  by  a 
Democratic  administration,  whether  national,  State,  or  munici- 
pal, is  debarred,  as  a  penalty,  from  all  participation  in  the  nom- 
inations of  his  party.  Such  a  provision  is  perfectly  in  harmony 
with  the  past  and  present  practice  of  the  two  great  parties  in 
New  York  city.68 

The  New  York  rules  contain  another  provision  on  the  same 

61  Rule  12,  Sec.  3.  There  is  a  provision  in  the  same  rale  that  no  person  shall 
be  eligible  as  a  delegate  to  more  than  one  convention  in  the  same  year  ;  and  also 
that  no  delegate  to  a  convention  shall  be  a  candidate  for  a  nomination  in  that 
convention.  M  Art.  XVII. 

68  The  original  object  of  this  provision  was  probably  the  same  as  the  enrolment 
provisions,  viz. :  the  prevention  of  members  of  the  opposite  party  from  controlling 
nominations. 


SECT.  14.]  IN  REGARD  TO  PARTY  RULES.  171 

general  subject,  viz. :  a  prohibition  upon  the  county  committee 
from  "  entertaining  any  motion  or  resolution  recommending 
any  person  for  any  political  office  not  filled  by  election  by  the 
people."  M  This  provision  was  undoubtedly  intended  to  pre- 
vent the  bestowal  of  government  patronage  as  a  reward  for 
party  service;  but  it  is  to  a  great  extent  neutralized  by  the 
other  provision  just  described. 

On  this  same  subject  of  the  status  of  office-holders,  the  Phila- 
delphia rules  provide  that  no  person  "  holding  any  office  or 
employment  of  honor,  trust  or  profit  under  the  national,  state  or 
municipal  governments  or  any  department  thereof,  shall  be 
eligible  as  registering  officer." M  This  provision,  so  far  as  it 
goes,  is  certainly  in  the  line  of  civil  service  reform. 

14.  Conclusions  in  Regard  to  Party  Rules.  Enough  has  been 
presented  in  the  preceding  sections  to  give  the  reader  a  fair  idea 
of  the  general  character  of  party  rules  so  far  as  they  affect 
nominations.  As  we  have  seen,  the  rules  differ  from  city  to 
city,  being  framed  to  meet  the  particular  needs  of  the  place 
and  time ;  but  all  of  them  contain  some  provisions  which  might 
well  be  applied  everywhere.  Most  of  the  provisions  certainly 
furnish  practical  remedies  for  existing  evils,  and  in  Philadelphia 
and  Boston,  particularly  in  the  latter,  they  have  accomplished 
much  good ;  a  few  of  them,  notably  in  New  York,  while  ostensi- 
bly steps  in  the  path  of  reform,  in  reality  constitute  a  cunningly 
devised  scheme  on  the  part  of  the  professional  politicians,  to 
strengthen  their  already  too  firm  grip  on  the  party  organization. 

All  things  considered,  however,  we  may  say  that,  in  the 
absence  of  legislation  upon  the  subject,  many  of  the  evils  which 
have  been  described  in  earlier  chapters  may  be  remedied  by  the 
adoption  of  a  few  simple  and  intelligent  party  rules  with  pro- 
visions for  the  following  objects: 

(i)  Some  simple  form  of  registration  or  enrolment  of  the 
party  voters,  care  being  taken  not  to  deprive  bonafide  members 
of  the  party  of  their  rights ;  to  this  end  a  written  statement  of 
the  applicant  that  he  is  a  member  of  the  party  should  be  suffi- 

*  Art.  XVIII. 

66  Rule  2,  Sec.  i.  There  is  a  similar  prohibition  in  the  case  of  officers  at 
primaries  (see  Rule  4,  Sec.  2). 


172  REGULATION  BY  PARTY  RULES.    [CHAP.  VIII. 

cient,  unless  the  contrary  is  absolutely  known  to  a  majority  of 
the  committee  in  charge. 

(2)  Stringent  requirements  for  the  giving  of  sufficient  notice 
of  the  time  and  place  of  all  caucuses  and  primaries,  together 
with  a  reasonable  publication  of  the  same  in  the  newpapers  and 
elsewhere. 

(3)  A  few  simple  and  carefully  drawn  rules  of  procedure  for 
the  government  of  the  primary  meetings,  the  object  being  to 
secure  the  orderly  conduct  of  business  and  a  fair  and  impartial 
count  of  the  votes. 

(4)  Some  provision  for  the  settlement  of  disputes,  either  by 
a  re-count  of  the  votes  by  the  proper  officers,  or  by  a  fair  hear- 
ing of  both  sides  before  an  impartial  tribunal. 

(5)  A  few  regulations  in  regard  to  the  procedure  of  nomi- 
nating conventions,  particularly  with  the  object  of  preventing 
the  unseating  of  duly  elected  delegates. 

(6)  The  prohibition  of  the  use  of  proxies   in  conventions. 
The  object  for  which  proxies  were  originally  intended  is  better 
accomplished  and  without  the  evils   incident  to   the   present 
system,  by  the  choice  of  alternates  by   the  caucus  or  primary. 
The  latter  method  is  already  used  in  the  choice  of  delegates  to 
national  conventions. 

(7)  The  ineligibility  of  all  appointive  national,  State,  county, 
and  municipal  office-holders  as  delegates  to  conventions. 

Some,  if  not  all,  of  the  foregoing  reforms  can,  of  course,  be 
incorporated  into  statute  law;  but  it  would  be  better,  if  possible, 
to  have  them  adopted  and  enforced  by  the  parties  themselves. 
In  order  to  secure  their  honest  enforcement,  however,  it  is 
necessary  that  honest  and  energetic  men  should  be  chosen  to 
positions  upon  the  party  committees  whose  duty  it  is  to  carry 
out  the  rules.  But  in  order  that  this  shall  be  the  case,  there 
must  be  a  considerable  degree  of  intelligence  and  interest  among 
the  rank  and  file  of  the  party  voters.  In  places  where  the  great 
mass  of  the  voters  are  ignorant,  or  where  the  machine  has  obtained 
such  a  grip  upon  the  party  organization  that  it  is  practically 
impossible  for  the  voters  to  help  themselves,  the  only  remedy 
is  to  call  in  the  strong  arm  of  the  law,  and  obtain,  by  statutory 
enactment,  what  party  rules  are  powerless  to  accomplish. 


CHAPTER   IX. 

REGULATION   BY   LAW. 

i.  The  Introduction  of  Legislation.  The  regulation  of  party 
nominations  by  law  is  a  matter  of  comparatively  recent  date. 
The  first  statute  upon  the  subject  appears  to  have  been  passed 
by  the  New  York  Legislature  in  1866.  It  was  very  weak  and 
ineffective,  and  was  superseded,  in  1882,  by  a  more  stringent 
act,  regulating  the  duties  of  inspectors  at  primaries,  and  im- 
posing penalties  for  illegal  voting  and  for  the  bribery  of  voters 
and  delegates.  In  1883,  the  Pennsylvania  Legislature  passed 
two  separate  acts  for  the  punishment  of  bribery  and  fraud  at 
primary  elections,  and  in  1884,  New  Jersey  passed  a  similar 
act.  Other  States  followed;  but  it  was  not  until  1888  that 
Massachusetts,  usually  in  advance  of  her  sister  States  in  the 
matter  of  election  laws,  passed  a  mild  law  for  the  regulation  of 
party  caucuses. 

In  addition  to  these  laws  for  the  regulation  of  caucuses  and 
primary  meetings,  the  introduction  of  the  Australian  ballot 
system  has  brought  with  it  a  new  system  of  official  nomina- 
tions by  "nomination  papers,"  together  with  certain  provisions 
concerning  certificates  of  nomination  to  be  furnished  by  cau- 
cuses and  conventions.  Such  certificates  are  rendered  neces- 
sary by  the  fact  that  all  ballots  are  printed  and  distributed  by 
the  State. 

At  the  present  time  (July,  1896)  there  is  only  one  State 
which  has  no  statutory  regulation  whatever  relative  to  the 
nomination  of  candidates  for  elective  office.1  In  all  except 
one  of  the  remaining  forty-four  States,  Australian  ballot  acts 

1  Louisiana. 


REGULATION  BY  LAW.  [CHAP.  IX. 

have  been  passed.2  Of  the  States  which  have  Australian 
ballot  acts,  at  least  twenty-five8  have  special  laws  regulating 
party  nominations,  apart  from  the  Australian  ballot  provisions. 
For  convenience,  we  shall  consider  first  the  provisions  of  the 
regular  ballot  acts  so  far  as  they  affect  nominations,  and  then 
pass  to  a  consideration  of  the  special  laws  to  which  reference 
has  just  been  made. 

2..  The  Regulation  of  Nominations  under  the  Australian  Ballot 
Acts.  Owing  to  the  fact  that  under  the  Australian  ballot 
system  the  State  authorities  have  charge  of  printing  all  ballots 
used  at  elections,  it  is  necessary  that  there  should  be  some 
legal  provisions  as  to  the  placing  of  names  of  candidates  upon 
the  official  ballot.  In  all  the  States  having  Australian  ballot 
laws,  except  three,4  two  methods  of  nomination  are  recog- 
nized,—  the  American  method  of  nomination  by  a  caucus  or 
convention  of  a  political  party,  and  the  English  method  of 
nomination  by  "petition,"  "certificate,"  or,  as  it  is  usually 
called,  a  "nomination  paper."  The  latter  method  was  in- 
tended for  "independent"  as  distinguished  from  "party" 
nominations.  Owing,  however,  to  the  "limitation"  provision 
in  the  laws  of  most  of  the  States,  according  to  which  a  politi- 
cal party  must  have  cast  a  certain  number  of  votes  at  the  pre- 
ceding election,  in  order  to  enable  it  to  get  the  names  of  its 
caucus  and  convention  nominees  upon  the  official  ballot,  it  has 
come  about  that  the  smaller  political  parties  have  been  obliged 
to  use  this  method  of  nomination  papers.  The  object  of  this 
limitation  is  to  prevent  the  ballot  from  becoming  unwieldy, 
and  therefore  confusing  to  the  voters.  It  is  doubtful,  however, 
if  such  a  motive  justifies  the  practical  disfranchisement  of  a 
considerable  number  of  legal  voters.  Before  the  introduction 
of  the  Australian  ballot,  these  small  parties  could  print  their 

*  The  single  exception  is  South  Carolina.  The  Florida  Act  (passed  in  1893) 
applies  only  to  the  city  of  Jacksonville. 

'  California,  Colorado,  Connecticut,  Delaware,  Georgia,  Illinois,  Kansas,  Ken- 
tucky, Maine,  Massachusetts,  Michigan,  Minnesota,  Mississippi,  Missouri,  Nebraska, 
Nevada,  New  Hampshire,  New  Jersey,  New  York,  North  Carolina,  Ohio,  Oregon, 
Pennsylvania,  Washington,  West  Virginia,  Wyoming. 

4  New  Hampshire,  Delaware,  and  Michigan  have  no  provision  for  nomination 
papers. 


SECT.  2.]  REGULATION  OF  NOMINATIONS.  175 

tickets  at  a  trifling  expense,  and  they  could  vote  those  tickets 
and  have  them  counted.  Under  the  present  system,  however, 
they  cannot  get  the  names  of  their  candidates  printed  upon 
the  official  ballot  unless  they  are  willing  to  go  to  the  trouble 
and  expense  of  circulating  nomination  papers. 

In  regard  to  this  matter  of  limitation,  the  laws  of  the  differ- 
ent States  differ  from  one  another  considerably,  the  requisite 
percentage  of  the  total  vote  ranging  from  ten  to  one;5  in 
eleven  States  there  is  no  legal  limitation,6  so  that  any  so- 
called  "political  party"  may  have  the  names  of  its  candidates 
placed  upon  the  official  ballot.  In  these  States  the  definitions 
of  a  political  party  and  of  a  convention  and. primary  are  of 
interest.  The  Delaware  Act  states  that  "a  political  party 
within  the  meaning  of  this  act  shall  be  an  organization  of  bona 
fide  citizens  and  voters  of  any  county  in  this  State,  which 
shall,  by  means  of  a  convention,  primary  election  or  otherwise, 
nominate  candidates  for  public  offices  to  be  filled  by  the  peo- 
ple at  any  general  or  special  election  within  the  State. "  7  In 
order,  however,  to  guard  against  bogus  parties,  the  law  further 
provides  that  "no  organization  shall  be  regarded  as  a  political 
party  that  does  not  represent  at  least  100  bona  fide  citizens  and 
voters  of  the  county  in  which  it  exists."  In  case  the  county 
clerk  has  any  doubt  as  to  the  genuineness  of  any  party,  he 
may  demand  a  certificate  signed  by  twenty-five  voters  belong- 
ing to  such  party.  The  Mississippi  Act  provides  that  the 
official  ballot  shall  contain  "  the  names  of  all  candidates  who 


6  Colorado  provides  that  a  party  must  have  cast  at  least  ten  per  cent  of  the 
entire  vote  of  the  State  or  district ;  Massachusetts,  West  Virginia,  Missouri,  Ne- 
vada, California,  and  Oregon  require  three  per  cent ;  Rhode  Island,  New  Jersey, 
Pennsylvania,  Kentucky,  Illinois,  Wisconsin,  and  Iowa  two  per  cent ;  and  Maine, 
New  Hampshire,  Vermont,  Maryland,  Ohio,  Indiana,  and  Minnesota  one  per  cent. 
In  fourteen  of  these  States  the  limitation  applies  to  districts  as  well  as  to  the  State 
at  large ;  in  the  remainder  only  to  the  State ;  and  in  New  Hampshire  and  Massa- 
chusetts only  the  vote  for  governor  is  considered.  The  rigor  of  the  Massachusetts 
three-per-cent  requirement  has  been  somewhat  modified  by  an  Act  passed  in  1895. 
(Acts  of  1895,  Ch.  323). 

6  New  York,  Delaware,  Mississippi,  Arkansas,  Michigan,  Kansas,  North  Dakota, 
South  Dakota,  Idaho,  Wyoming,  and  Washington. 

7  Registration  and  Election  Laws  of  the  State  of  Delaware  (Dover,  1892),  2- 
chapter  37,  Sec.  3,  of  the  Laws. 


1 76  REGULA TION  BY  LAW.  [CHAP.  IX. 

have  been  put  in  nomination  not  less  than  fifteen  days  pre- 
vious to  the  day  of  election,  by  a  nominating  convention,  or 
other  nominating  body,  or  at  a  primary  election  of  any  politi- 
cal party."8  Arkansas  puts  the  names  of  candidates  upon  the 
ballot,  provided  they  are  certified  to  by  the  chairman  and  secre- 
tary of  a  convention,  or  by  the  proper  officers  of  a  primary 
election  held  by  "any  organized  political  party."9  North 
Dakota,  South  Dakota,  Idaho,  and  Washington  all  define  a 
convention  as  "an  organized  assemblage  of  electors  or  dele- 
gates representing  a  political  party  or  principle."10 

3.  Certificates  of  Nomination.  Practically,  all  the  States 
having  Australian  ballot  laws  require  that  certificates  of  nomi- 
nation shall  be  filed  with  the  appropriate  officers,  stating  that 
the  party  holding  the  primary  or  convention  has  cast  the 
required  percentage  of  the  total  vote  at  the  preceding  election, 
together  with  the  names  of  the  candidates,  the  political  party 
they  represent,  the  offices  for  which  they  are  nominated,  and 
all  other  facts  required  by  law.11  In  the  case  of  candidates  for 
offices  to  be  voted  for  at  large  by  the  voters  of  the  entire  State, 
the  certificate  must  be  filed  with  the  Secretary  of  State,  while 
in  the  case  of  county  and  municipal  offices,  they  are  usually 
filed  with  the  county,  city,  or  town  clerks.12 

It  is  usually  provided  that  the  certificate  shall  be  signed  by 
the  presiding  officer  and  secretary  of  the  convention  or  caucus, 
and,  in  case  of  a  primary  election,  by  the  judge  of  election. 
In  Mississippi,  however,  the  provisions  of  the  law  in  this 
regard  are  very  loose.  The  law  provides  that  the  names  of  all 

8  Chapter  172,  of  the   Annotated  Code  of  Statute  Laws,  Sec.   51.     Registration 
and  Election  Laws  for  the  Information  of  Registrars  and  Commissioners  (Jackson, 
1892),  7. 

9  Act  of  1891,  Digest  of  the  Election  Laws  of  the  State  of  Arkansas,  published  by 
authority  of  the  General  Assembly  (Little  Rock,  1891),    II  (Sec  29). 

w  North  Dakota,  Act  of  March  7, 1891,  Sec.  2.  Election  Laws  of  North  Dakota, 
published  by  authority  (Bismarck,  1891),  8. 

11  Blank  certificates  of  nomination  will  be  found  in  Appendix  E. 

18  In  West  Virginia,  certificates  of  nomination  are  filed  with  the  clerk  of  the  cir- 
cuit court ;  while  in  Arkansas,  in  the  case  of  county  officers,  they  are  filed  with  the 
county  election  commissioners,  and  in  Pennsylvania  with  the  regular  county  com- 
missioners. In  West  Virginia,  however,  in  the  case  of  primary  elections,  the  cer- 
tificate must  be  signed  by  the  chairman  and  secretary  of  the  county  or  district 
committee. 


SECT.  4-]  NOMINATION  PAPERS.  177 

candidates  nominated  at  a  primary  or  convention  shall  be 
printed  upon  the  official  ballot  "  upon  the  written  request  of 
one  or  more  of  the  candidates  nominated,  or  of  any  qualified 
elector  who  will  make  oath,  that  he  was  a  member  of  the  con- 
vention or  other  nominating  body,  or  a  participant  in  the 
primary  election,  and  that  the  person  whose  name  is  presented 
by  him  was  nominated  by  such  convention  or  other  nominat- 
ing body  or  primary  election. "  13 

4.  Nomination  Papers.  The  nomination  paper  must  state 
the  name  of  the  candidate,  his  place  of  residence,  and  the 
office  for  which  he  is  nominated,  and  must  be  signed  by  a  cer- 
tain minimum  number  of  legal  voters.  According  to  the 
English  law,  "every  nomination  paper  must  be  signed  by  two 
registered  electors  as  proposer  and  seconder,  and  by  eight  other 
registered  electors  as  assenting  to  the  nomination."  u  That  is, 
it  only  requires  ten  signatures  to  nominate  a  candidate  for  the 
English  Parliament;  in  the  United  States,  on  the  other  hand, 
the  number  is,  as  a  rule,  much  larger.  The  object  of  this 
severe  requirement,  as  of  the  percentage  requirement,  is  the 
prevention  of  frivolous  nominations.  In  regard  to  the  wisdom 
of  such  restrictions,  Mr.  John  Wigmore,  in  his  admirable 
little  book  on  the  Australian  ballot  system,  truly  says:  "The 
real  restrictions  on  the  number  of  candidates  will  be  found  to 
be,  as  English  and  Australian  experience  shows,  public  opinion 
and  the  interests  of  the  aspirants.  The  former  will  throw  ridi- 
cule on  a  candidacy  which  has  no  support,  and  the  latter  will, 
as  now,  have  a  deterring  influence  wherever  there  is  not  some 
strong  ground  for  the  candidacy. "  16  In  England  the  fact 
that  the  candidates  have  to  bear  all  the  official  expenses  of 
holding  the  election,  is  a  strong  safeguard  against  frivolous 
nominations. 

In  regard  to  the  number  of  signatures  required,  there  is  a 
great  diversity  among  the  different  States.  Some  of  the 

13  Annotated  Code  of  Statute  Laws  (1892),  chapter  172,  Sec.  51. 

"  Act  of  1872  (35  and  36  Viet.  c.  33) ;  Statutes  Revised,  XVI.  934.  For  forms  of 
English  and  American  nomination  papers,  see  Appendix  E. 

15  The  Australian  Ballot  System  as  embodied  in  the  Legislation  of  Various  Countries 
(Boston,  1889),  75. 

12 


I7g  REGULATION  BY  LAW.  [CHAP.  IX. 

States  require  a  certain  definite  minimum  number  of  signa- 
tures, while  others  require  a  minimum  percentage  of  the  total 
vote.  For  the  nomination  of  candidates  to  be  voted  for  at 
large  by  the  people  of  the  entire  State,  the  smallest  require- 
ment is  50,  the  largest,  numerically,  3,000;  the  largest  per- 
centage of  the  total  vote,  five;  the  smallest  one  half  of  one  per 
cent. 16 

For  the  nomination  of  candidates  for  district  offices,  there 
is  the  widest  diversity,  ranging  from  500  signatures  for  a  city 
office  in  New  York  State  to  10  in  Iowa;  and  from  a  number 
equal  to  five  per  cent  of  the  total  vote  of  the  district  in  Cali- 
fornia to  one  per  cent  in  Maine.17 

The  law  usually  provides  that  each  voter  signing  a  nomina- 
tion paper  shall  also  write  his  place  of  residence,  and  that  at 
least  one  of  the  signers  shall  take  oath  that  the  statements 
contained  in  the  nomination  paper  are  true.  In  addition,  in 
Massachusetts,  the  registrars  of  voters  of  the  cities  and  towns 
must  certify  that  all  the  names  upon  each  nomination  paper 
are  the  names  of  duly  qualified  voters,  before  the  name  of  the 

16  New  York  requires  3,000  signatures ;  five  States,  viz.,  Maine,  Massachusetts, 
Kentucky,  Illinois,  and  Wisconsin,  1,000;  six,  viz.,  Rhode  Island,  Maryland,  Indi- 
ana, Iowa,  Kansas,  and  Colorado,  500;  one,  Idaho,  300;  one,  Oregon,  250;  two, 
North  and  South  Dakota,  200;  one,  Washington,  100;  and  one,  Mississippi,  50. 
The  Arkansas  law  provides  that  the  number  of  signatures  for  State,  district,  or 
county  officers  shall  not  be  less  than  50  nor  more  than  1,000  ;  Pennsylvania  requires 
that  the  number  of  signatures  shall  be  equal  to  at  least  one  half  of  one  per  cent  of 
the  largest  total  vote  of  the  State  ;  Vermont,  New  Jersey,  West  Virginia,  Ohio, 
Minnesota,  Missouri,  and  Wyoming  one  per  cent,  the  requirement  in  the  case  of 
the  first  three  applying  to  any  particular  district  as  well  as  to  the  State ;  Nevada 
has  a  three-per-cent  requirement  with  the  significant  proviso  that  the  number  of 
signatures  must  not  be  less  than  three;  while  the  California  Act  provides  that  the 
number  of  signatures  shall  equal  at  least  five  per  cent  of  the  total  vote  of  the  State 
or  district. 

17  For  instance,  for  congressmen,  Maryland  requires  500  signatures ;    Rhode 
Island,  250;  Indiana,  200.     For  county  officers,  Ohio  requires  300  signatures;  Col- 
orado and  North  Dakota,   100 ;  Idaho,  Washington,  and  Oregon,  50 ;  Iowa  and 
Kansas,   25;   South  Dakota,   20.     Maine,  Vermont,  Massachusetts,   New   Jersey, 
West  Virginia,  and  Wisconsin  require  a  number  of  signatures  equal  to  at  least  one 
per  cent  of  the  total  vote  of  the  district  for  which  the  candidate  is  nominated ; 
Pennsylvania  has  a  two-per-cent  requirement ;  Illinois  requires  two  per  cent,  except 
in  the  case  of  village  officers,  where  the  requirement  is  raised  to  five  per  cent;  while 
California  requires  five  per  cent  in  all  cases. 


SECT.  5.]          FILING   OF  NOMINATION  PAPERS. 

candidate  will  be  placed  upon  the  official  ballot.18  In  almost 
all  the  States,  it  is  made  a  penal  offence  for  a  person  to  sign 
more  than  one  nomination  paper  for  the  same  office. 

5.  Filing  of  Nomination  Papers.  Nomination  papers  are 
required  to  be  filed  with  the  same  officers  as  the  certificates 
from  the  officers  of  caucuses  and  conventions  already  referred 
to.  In  regard  to  the  time  of  filing  of  both  certificates  and 
papers,  there  is  the  widest  diversity.  Some  States  have  a  dif- 
ferent requirement  for  nomination  papers  than  for  certificates, 
a  longer  time  being  allowed  for  filing  the  former.  Moreover, 
many  States  have  different  dates  for  State,  county,  and  muni- 
cipal offices,  which,  when  combined  with  different  dates  for 
certificates  and  nomination  papers,  results  in  a  confusion  which 
is  absolutely  unnecessary.19  The  last  date  for  filing  certifi- 
cates and  nomination  papers  varies  from  thirty-five  to  three 
days  before  election,  the  earlier  dates  being  required  in  the 
case  of  officers  to  be  voted  for  by  the  people  of  the  State  at 
large,  and  the  later  dates  for  district  and  town  officers.  Nine- 
teen States  have  a  maximum  limit  for  the  filing  of  certificates 
and  papers,  ranging  from  forty  to  one  hundred  days,  sixty  days 
being  the  most  common.20 

18  See  Massachusetts  Acts  of  1893,  chapter  417,  Sec.  78. 

19  Seven  States,  however,  Maine,  New  Hampshire,   Rhode  Island,  Delaware 
West  Virginia,  Mississippi,  and  Michigan  make  no  distinction  between  the  differ- 
ent grades  of  officers,  but  require  all  certificates  and  papers  to  be  filed  on  or  before 
a  certain  specified  day. 

20  The  New  York  Act  is  a  fair  sample  of  the  unnecessary  complexity  of  some  of 
the  statutory  provisions  for  the  filing  of  certificates  and  papers  ;  the  provisions  are 
as  follows  : 

"  The  different  certificates  of  nominations  shall  be  filed  within  the  following 
periods  before  the  election  for  which  the  nominations  are  made,  to  wit :  Those 
required  to  be  filed  with  the  secretary  of  State,  if  party  nominations,  at  least  25  and 
not  more  than  40  days  ;  if  independent  nominations,  at  least  20  and  not  more  than 
40  days ;  those  required  to  be  filed  with  a  county  clerk  or  the  board  of  police  com- 
missioners of  the  city  of  New  York,  or  the  board  of  election  of  the  city  of  Brook- 
lyn, if  party  nominations,  at  least  20,  and  not  more  than  30  days ;  if  independent 
nominations,  at  least  15  and  not  more  than  30  days;  those  required  to  be  filed  with 
the  city  clerk  of  any  other  city,  if  party  nominations,  at  least  10  and  not  more  than 
20  days,  if  independent  nominations,  at  least  8  and  not  more  than  20  days  ;  those 
required  to  be  filed  with  a  town  or  village  clerk,  if  party  nominations,  at  least  6  and 
not  more  than  20  days ;  if  independent  nominations,  at  least  5  and  not  more  than 
20  days."  (Chapter  680  of  the  Acts  of  1892;  chapter  vi.  of  the  General  Laws 


!8o  REGULATION  BY  LAW.  [CHAP.  IX. 

6.  Withdrawal  of  Candidates.  Most  of  the  States  have  some 
provision  for  the  withdrawal  of  candidates.  In  Massachusetts 
and  Colorado  nomination  papers  must  be  accompanied  by  the 
written  acceptance  of  the  candidate.  In  Oregon  a  formal 
acceptance  is  required  in  the  case  of  convention  nominations 
as  well  as  in  the  case  of  nomination  papers.  This  is  to  pre- 
vent the  politicians  of  one  party  from  putting  up  a  prominent 
man  of  the  other  party  as  an  independent  candidate  without 
his  knowledge  or  consent,  in  order  to  weaken  their  "regular" 
opponent  and  elect  their  own  man.  It  is  an  eminently  proper 
provision,  and  ought  to  be  universally  adopted.  Usually, 
however,  silence  is  construed  as  acceptance,  and  a  formal 
withdrawal  is  required,  in  order  to  prevent  the  name  of  a  duly 
nominated  candidate  from  appearing  on  the  official  ballot.21 

In  case  of  the  death  or  withdrawal  of  a  candidate,  it  is 
usually  provided  that  a  new  candidate  may  be  nominated  in 
the  same  way  as  the  original  candidate  was  nominated.  If, 
however,  the  time  is  too  short  for  calling  a  caucus  or  conven- 
tion, in  case  no  provision  for  the  filling  of  vacancies  has  been 
made  by  the  original  caucus  or  convention,  the  State  or  dis- 
trict committee  of  the  party  is  generally  empowered  to  fill  the 
vacancy.22 

Sec.  59.)  It  will  be  observed  that  this  act  contains  all  three  complications,  viz., 
a  different  date  for  certificates  of  nomination  and  nomination  papers,  different 
dates  for  the  different  grades  of  offices,  and  a  maximum  as  well  as  a  minimum 
time  limit. 

21  In  Massachusetts  and  Colorado,  the  withdrawal  must  be  filed  within  three  days 
of  the  final  date  for  filing  certificates  and  papers.  In  Idaho,  the  withdrawal  must 
be  filed  at  least  30  days  before  election  ;  in  North  Dakota,  25  days  ;  in  Washington, 
20  days ;  in  South  Dakota,  3  to  15  days  according  to  the  office ;  in  Illinois,  Iowa,  and 
Kansas,  8  to  15  days  ;  in  Rhode  Island,  12  days ;  in  New  Jersey  and  Mississippi,  10 
days ;  and  in  New  York,  8  to  10  days,  except  in  the  case  of  town  and  village  officers. 
In  Oregon,  a  candidate  can  withdraw  any  time  before  election  day.  In  case  the 
ballots  have  been  printed,  his  name  is  cancelled  on  the  ballot  and  "  cards  of  instruc- 
tion "  announcing  the  fact  of  his  withdrawal  are  circulated  at  the  polls.  (Act  of 
1891,  Sec.  51  ;  Election  Laws,  1891,  31.) 

23  In  case  the  committee  cannot  be  got  together,  the  West  Virginia  Act  provides 
that  the  chairman  of  the  committee  shall  have  power  to  fill  the  vacancy.  In  Indi- 
ana, unless  a  legal  convention  is  called,  the  sole  power  of  filling  all  vacancies  is 
given  by  the  law  to  the  chairman  of  the  State  or  district  committee.  In  case  of 
the  death  or  withdrawal  of  a  candidate  after  the  ballots  have  been  printed,  in  twelve 
States,  —  Delaware,  West  Virginia,  Kentucky,  Ohio,  Michigan,  Minnesota,  Iowa, 


SECT.  8.]  PUBLICATION  OF  NOMINATIONS.  iSi 

7.  Settlement  of  Disputes.     In  several  of  the  States  provision 
is  made  for  the  settlement  of  disputes  in  regard  to  the  validity 
of  nominations.     Thus,   in  Massachusetts,23  all  objections   to 
the  validity  of  nominations  must  be  filed  within  seventy-two 
hours  of  the  close  of  the  time  for  filing  such  nominations,  and 
all  such  cases  are  tried  and  decided  by  the  Ballot  Law  Com- 
mission, which  is  composed  of  three  members  appointed   by 
the  governor  from  the  different  political  parties.24 

8.  Publication  of  Nominations.     In  most  of  the  States  there 
is  some  provision  for  the  publication  of   nominations  by  the 
Secretary  of  State,  or  the  county  or  town  clerks,  as  the  case 
may  be.     It   is  usually  provided  that   the    list  of   nominees 
shall  be  published  in  two  papers,  one  of  each  of  the  two  lead- 
ing political  parties  in  each  county  or  district,  or  else  posted 

Kansas,  North  Dakota,  Idaho,  Wyoming,  and  Washington,  —  provision  is  made 
that  "  stickers  "  or  "  pasters  "  with  the  name  of  the  new  candidate  may  be  furnished 
to  the  election  officers  by  the  party  committee.  For  example,  see  Wyoming  act  of 
1891,  Sec.  loo;  Election  Laws  (Cheyenne,  1891),  38. 

23  Act  of  1893,  chapter  417,  Sec.  85.     Such  controversies  usually  take  the  form 
of  a  dispute  as  to  which  of  two  persons  is  the  "  regular  "  party  candidate,  or  as  to 
the  validity  of  a  nomination  paper. 

24  In  New  York,  objection  must  be  filed  within  three  days  of  the  filing  of  the 
certificate  or  nomination  paper,  and  the  decision  of  the  officer  with  whom  it  is  filed 
is  final,  unless  appeal  is  made  to  the  ordinary  courts  of  law.     In  New  Jersey,  the 
objection  must  be  filed  within  five  days  of  the  filing  of  the  original  nomination,  and 
the  case  is  decided  in  the  first  instance  by  the  city  or  town  clerk,  with  the  right  of 
appeal  to  the  justice  of  the  supreme  court  for  the  circuit.     In  Pennsylvania,  such 
disputes  are  decided  by  the  Court  of  Common  Pleas ;  and,  in  Delaware,  by  the 
clerk  of  the  county,  with  an  appeal  to  a  board  composed  of  the  clerks  of  the  three 
counties  sitting  at  the  State  capital.    In  Ohio,  objection  must  be  filed  within  five 
days  of  the  filing  of  the  original  nomination ;  the  dispute  is  settled  in  the   first 
instance  by  the  officer  with  whom  it  is  filed,  with  the  right  of  appeal  to  the  State 
supervisor  of  elections.     In  Indiana,  all  disputes  concerning  the  validity  of  nomi- 
nations are  settled  by  the  "  Board  of  Election  Commissioners."    In  Illinois,  disputes 
in  regard  to  the  validity  of  nominations  for  officers  to  be  voted  for  by  the  voters  of 
the  State  at  large,  are  settled  by  a  board  composed  of  the  secretary  of  state,  the 
State  auditor,  and  the  attorney-general ;  in  the  case  of  candidates  for  county  and 
district  officers,  by  a  board  composed  of  the  county  judge,  the  county  clerk,  and  the 
district-attorney ;  and  in  the  case  of  candidates  for  municipal  officers,  by  a  board 
composed  of  the  mayor,  the  president  of  the  board  of  aldermen,  and  the  city  or 
town  clerk.    The  same  system  is  found  in  Iowa  and  Kansas,  with  the  exception 
that  the  county  auditor,  and  a  member  of  the  common  council  chosen  by  lot,  are 
substituted  for  the  county  judge   and  the  president  of  the  board  of  aldermen 
respectively. 


1 82  REGULATION  BY  LAW.  [CHAP.  IX. 

in  a  certain  number  of  public  places.  Some  of  the  far  western 
States  have  very  elaborate  provisions  on  this  subject.  The 
section  of  the  Colorado  act  upon  the  subject  is  fifty-five  lines 
in  length,  and  contains,  among  other  things,  a  provision  for 
ascertaining  the  two  papers  which  have  the  largest  bona  fide 
circulation  in  the  county  or  city.26 

In  Oregon,  there  is  a  provision  for  a  "register  of  nomina- 
tions "  open  to  public  inspection,28  and  some  provision  for  the 
publicity  of  the  names  of  candidates  filed  with  the  authorities 
is  found  in  the  laws  of  all  the  States. 

9.  Penalties.     The  defacing,  destroying,  falsifying,  or  sup- 
pression of  a  certificate  of  nomination,   or  of  a  nomination 
paper,  is,  in  most  of  the  States,  made  a  criminal  offence.    The 
penalty  varies   greatly,   the   maximum   ranging  from   $50  to 
$1,000  fine,  and  from  six  months'  to  five  years'  imprisonment. 
Penalties  are  also,  as  a  rule,  imposed  on  persons  signing  more 
than  one  nomination  paper,  taking  a  false  oath,  or  committing 
other  similar  offences  against  good  government. 

10.  Special  Laws  governing  Nominations.     Coming   now  to 
laws  regulating  nominations,  apart  from  the  Australian  ballot 
provisions,  it  is  to  be  observed  that  such  statutes  differ  widely 
in  their  scope  of  application.     For  example,  at   the   present 
time,    Massachusetts,    Pennsylvania,27  South   Carolina,    Miss- 
issippi, and  Nevada  have  acts  upon  their  statute  books  which 
are  applicable  to  the  whole  State  and  to  all  party  nominations. 
In  the  Michigan  act,  the  provisions  prescribing  the  hour  when 
primary  elections  shall  be  open,  and  requiring  voting  by  ballot, 
are  applicable  only  to  cities  of  25,000  population  or  over,  the 
rest  of  the  act  being  applicable  to  the  whole   State.28     In 
Missouri,  the  act  of  1890,  requiring  officers  of  primary  elec- 
tions to  take  oath,  and  punishing  illegal  voting,  briber)',  and 
fraudulent  returns,  is  applicable  to  the  entire  State;  but  the 
act  of  1891,  which  applies  certain  of  the  provisions  of  the  Aus- 

*  Act  of  1891,  Sec.  II ;  Election  Laws  (1893),  3°~32- 

98  Act  of  1891,  Sees.  39  and  40;  Election  Laws  (1891),  24. 

27  The  Pennsylvania  act  simply  requires  the  officers  of  primaries  to  take  oath, 
and  punishes  bribery,  fraud,  and  corruption.  The  acts  of  the  other  three  States 
are  much  more  comprehensive. 

»  Act  of  1893,  Sec.  9 ;  Public  Acts  (1893),  275. 


SECT,  ii.]        TIME  AND  PLACE   OF  PRIMARIES.  183 

tralian  ballot  to  primary  meetings,  is  applicable  only  to  cities 
of  300,000  and  upward, — i.e.,  to  St.  Louis;  and  to  parties 
casting  at  least  one-fourth  of  the  entire  vote, —  i.  e.,  the  Re- 
publican and  Democratic  parties.29  The  provisions  of  the  New 
York  law,  concerning  the  qualifications  of  voters,  the  duties 
of  chairman,  etc.,  are  applicable  to  the  whole  State,  but  cer- 
tain additional  requirements,  made  compulsory  at  the  written 
request  of  five  party  voters,  are  applicable  only  to  places  hav- 
ing a  population  of  5,000  and  upwards.30  The  Oregon  act  is 
applicable  only  to  cities  having  a  population  of  2,500  and 
upwards,  but  is  compulsory  on  all  nominations  in  those 
places.81  The  New  Jersey  act,  which  simply  requires  the 
officers  of  primaries  to  take  oath,  and  which  punishes  corrupt 
practices,  is  applicable  only  to  cities.32  West  Virginia,33 
Kentucky,34  and  Wyoming36  have  acts  which  are  optional  in 
their  character, — i.  e.,  they  apply  only  to  those  caucuses  or 
primary  elections  expressly  called  under  the  provisions  of  the 
act.  The  California  act  is  also  optional  in  regard  to  all  its 
provisions,  except  those  concerning  fraud  and  bribery.36 

n.  Time  and  Place  of  holding  Primaries.  All  of  these  acts 
contain  some  provision  in  regard  to  the  calling  of  caucuses  and 
primaries ;  and  here  again  there  is  a  wide  difference  between  the 
enactments  of  the  different  States.  For  example,  the  Wyoming 
act  simply  requires  that  the  call  shall  designate  the  person 
who  is  to  call  the  caucus  to  order;37  while  in  Oregon,  the 
"managing  committee  "  of  the  party  calling  the  meeting  must 
give  seven  days'  notice  of  the  primary,  signed  by  the  secretary 

29  Act  of  April  18,  1891,  Sec.  I. 

80  Laws  of  1892,  chapter  680,  Sees.  51  and  52. 

81  Act  of  Feb.  n,  1891,  Sec.  i ;  Election  Laws  (1891),  51. 

82  Cf.  title  of  Act  of  1884:  "An  Act  to  regulate  the  holding  of  and  to  prevent 
frauds  in  the  primary  elections  of  the  several  political  parties  in  the  cities  of  the 
state  of  New  Jersey." 

83  Act  of  March  5,  1891  ;  Acts  of  1891,  chapter  67,  Sec.  i. 

84  Acts  of  1892,  chapter  65,  Article  xii.  Sec.  4.    Instruction  to  Election  Officers 
(1892),  42. 

35  Act  of  1891,  chapter  32,  Sec.  I.     Election  Laws  (1891),  3. 
»  Political  Code,  Sec.  1357;  Election  Laws  (1892),  39.     See  also  chapter  16  of 
Acts  of  1893,  Sec-  "• 
87  Act  of  1891,  Sec.  2. 


1 84  REGULATION  BY  LAW.  [CHAP.  IX. 

of  the  committee,  and  stating  the  time  and  place,  the  hours 
during  which  the  polls  are  to  be  open,  together  with  the  names 
of  the  three  election  judges,  — all  of  which  must  be  published 
in  some  "newspaper  of  general  circulation  in  the  city."88 

In  addition  to  these  requirements  in  regard  to  the  calling  of 
caucuses  and  primaries,  four  States  have  certain  special  pro- 
visions regarding  either  the  time  when  such  meetings  shall 
be  open,  or  in  regard  to  the  place  where  they  are  to  be  held. 
For  instance,  New  York  has  a  provision  that  party  primaries 
may  be  held  at  any  hour  between  9  A.  M.  and  9  p.  M.  ,  as  the 
party  organization  may  decide.39  The  object  of  this  provision 
is  to  prevent  the  primaries  from  being  held  at  inconvenient 
times,  when  only  those  personally  interested  would  take  the 
trouble  to  attend.  The  Michigan  act,  which  in  this  regard 
is  the  most  comprehensive,  provides  that  "  no  primary  election 
shall  be  held  in  a  saloon,  bar-room,  or  any  place  adjacent  to 
a  room  or  place  where  intoxicating  liquors  are  sold,"40  —  a 
laudable  attempt  to  get  rid  of  the  influence  of  the  saloon  in 
politics.  The  statutes  of  the  same  State  further  provide  that 
"primary  elections  known  as  caucuses  for  the  nomination  of 
candidates  .  .  .  shall  be  made  to  begin  at  3  o'clock  in  the 
afternoon  and  to  continue  until  8  o'clock  in  the  evening."*1 
In  Missouri,  where  the  Australian  ballot  system  is  made  com- 
pulsory on  the  Republican  and  Democratic  primaries  in  St. 
Louis,  the  city  authorities  are  obliged  to  furnish  two  polling 
places  in  each  ward.42  The  Oregon  act  provides  that  "the 
polling  places  at  all  primary  elections  shall  be  kept  open  for 
the  reception  of  votes  not  less  than  five  nor  more  than  seven 
consecutive  hours,  and  between  the  hours  of  12  o'clock  noon 
and  7  o'clock  P.  M."43 

88  Primary  Law  0/1891,  Sec.  2.  Election  Laws  (1891),  52.  In  Michigan,  at  least 
five  days'  notice  must  be  given  "  by  publication  in  one  or  more  daily  papers  in 
places  where  such  papers  are  published  and  in  other  cases  by  posting  up  notices 
in  at  least  three  public  places  in  the  precinct  for  which  the  primary  election  is  to 
be  held."  (Acts  of  1893,  No.  175,  Sec.  9;  Public  Acts,  274-5). 

"  Chapter  680  of  General  Laws  0/1892,  Sec.  51. 

40  Act  of  1893,  Sec.  8;  Election  Lams  (1894),  36. 

41  Act  of  1893,  Sec.  9;  Election  Laws  (1894),  36. 
*»  Act  of  April  18,  1891,  Sec.  3. 

*•  Act  of  Feb.  ii,  1891,  Sec.  4;  Election  Laws  (1891),  $3. 


SECT.  12.]  QUALIFICATIONS  FOR    VOTING.  ^5 

12.  Qualifications  for  Voting  at  Caucuses  and  Primary  Elec- 
tions. In  all  the  States  having  statutes  on  the  subject,  a  per- 
son, in  order  to  vote  at  a  caucus  or  primary,  must  be  a  legal 
voter  of  the  district  in  which  it  is  held.  Apart  from  this,  the 
matter  is  usually  left  to  the  party  rules.  For  instance,  the 
New  York  law,  after  stating  that  a  person  must  be  a  legal 
voter  in  the  election  district,  goes  on  to  provide  that  he  must, 
in  addition,  possess  "such  other  qualifications  as  shall  be 
authorized  by  the  regulations  and  usages  of  the  party  holding 
the  primary."44  In  Michigan46  and  Oregon,46  in  case  any 
voter  is  challenged,  he  must  make  oath  that  he  is  duly  quali- 
fied to  vote ;  while  in  South  Carolina  all  persons  voting  at  a 
primary  are  required  to  take  such  an  oath.47  The  Kentucky 
law  has  a  provision  for  the  registration  of  party  voters,  and  no 
one  can  vote  at  a  primary  election  unless  his  name  appears 
upon  the  registered  list.48  The  system  of  registration  is  very 
simple  and  effective.  In  the  regular  registration  books  of  the 
State  officers  there  is  an  additional  column,  headed,  "Party 
affiliation,"  and  each  applicant  for  registration  is  asked  the 
question,  "What  political  party  do  you  desire  to  affiliate 
with?"  No  one  is  compelled  to  answer  this  question;  but  all 
who  do  answer  it  register  themselves  at  once  for  the  primaries 
and  for  the  regular  election.  The  persons  authorized  by  a 
party  committee  to  copy  the  names  of  the  party  voters  from 
the  books  at  the  registrar's  office  are  obliged  to  take  oath  to 
perform  their  duty  faithfully.  A  heavy  penalty  is  imposed  for 
neglect  of  this  duty,  and  also  for  changing  or  mutilating  the 
primary  registration  books  belonging  to  the  party  committee. 
Persons  who  have  failed  to  register  at  the  regular  registration 
may  be  "specially  registered,"  provided  that  they  file  an 
affidavit  that  they  were  actually  prevented  from  registering  at 
the  appointed  time,  supported  by  the  written  testimony  of 

44  Chapter  vi.  of  the  General  Laws,  Sec.  53. 

45  Act  of  1887,  Sec.  2  ;  Election  Laws  (1894),  36. 

46  Act  of  1891,  Sec.  7;  Election  Laws  (1891),  54. 
<T  Act  of  1888,  Sec.  3. 

48  This  provision  applies  only  to  primary  elections  called  under  the  act.  In  all 
other  cases,  all  legal  voters  may  vote,  provided  they  conform  to  the  party  rules.  If 
challenged,  an  oath  is  required.  Act  of  1892,  Sec.  10 ;  Instructions  (1892),  46. 


1 86  REGULATION  BY  LAW.  [CHAP.  IX. 

"two  well-known  and  reputable  residents  of  the  precinct  set- 
ting  forth  the  reason,  etc."  In  case  sickness  is  given  as  a 
reason,  the  affidavit  must  be  signed  by  "some  reputable 
physician."49 

13.  Organization  and  Conduct  of  Caucuses  and  Primary  Elec- 
tions. In  regard  to  the  conduct  of  primaries,  some  of  the 
States  have  scarcely  any  provision  upon  the  subject,  while 
others  have  laid  down  more  or  less  detailed  rules  of  procedure 
for  the  government  of  the  primary  meetings.  As  examples 
of  the  former  class  may  be  mentioned,  New  Jersey60  and 
Pennsylvania,61  where  the  law  simply  provides  that  all  officers 
of  primaries  shall  take  oath  to  perform  their  duties  in  accord- 
ance with  the  party  rules  and  the  laws  of  the  State  relative  to 
bribery  and  corruption;  and  Michigan  ^  and  West  Virginia,63 
which  merely  require  that  all  voting  shall  be  by  ballot  with 
the  qualification,  in  the  case  of  the  latter,  "unless  otherwise 
provided  in  the  call."  New  York  and  Wyoming  are  good 
examples  of  the  other  class,  the  statute  being  optional  in  the 
case  of  the  first,  compulsory  in  the  case  of  the  second. 

The  New  York  law  provides  that  the  primary  shall  be  pre- 
sided over  and  conducted  by  officers  elected  in  accordance 
with  the  rules  of  the  party.  In  places  having  a  population  of 
5,000  and  over,  if  five  party  voters  so  request  the  chairman  of 
the  general  or  district  committee  in  writing,  the  following 
additional  requirements  become  operative.64 

(1)  The  chairman  and  other  officers  must  take  oath  to  faith- 
fully perform  their  duties  in  accordance  with  the  laws  of  the 
State  and  the  rules  of  the  party. 

(2)  All  candidates  and  delegates  must  be  chosen  by  ballot. 

(3)  The  polls  must  be  open  continuously,  at  least  one  hour. 

(4)  The  tellers  must  keep  a  "poll  list"  of  the  names  and 
residences  of  all  persons  voting. 

49  Act  of  June   30,  1892,  Sees.  6,  7,  and  8;   Instructions  to  Election  Officers 

(1892),  43-5- 

40  Act  of  1884  !  Public  Laws,  323. 

61  Act  of  June,  1881 ;  Brightley-Purdon,  Digest  (Philadephia,  1885),  i.  677. 

"  Act  of  1891,  Sec.  3. 

M  Acts  of  1893,  165,  166. 

**  Chapter  vi.  of  General  Laws,  Sec.  52. 


SECT.  14.]  PENAL  PROVISIONS.  !87 

(5)  "  Watchers  "  must  be  appointed  to  look  after  the  interest 
of  each  candidate  or  set  of  delegates  so  requesting.56 

(6)  The  chairman  must  file  with  the  county  clerk  a  sworn 
statement  of  the  result,  together  with  the  poll    list,   ballots, 
and  all  other  papers  relating  to  the  primary. 

The  Wyoming  law,  which  was  modelled  after  the  Massachu- 
setts act  of  1888,  is  very  simple  in  its  requirements.  It  pro- 
vides that  the  caucus  shall  be  called  to  order  by  the  person 
designated  in  the  call,  in  the  absence  of  whom  the  caucus  is 
empowered  to  choose  a  temporary  chairman.  The  organiza- 
tion of  the  meeting  by  the  choice  of  a  permanent  chairman 
and  secretary  is  the  first  business  in  order.  At  the  written 
request  of  five  or  more  qualified  voters,  a  ballot  must  be  taken 
for  the  choice  of  any  delegate  or  member  of  a  political  com- 
mittee, "unless  the  caucus  shall  vote  to  dispense  with  such 
ballot."66  At  the  written  request  of  five  voters,  the  secretary 
of  the  caucus  is  required  to  preserve  the  ballots  and  voting 
lists,  and  "  shall  produce  the  same  if  called  for  by  any  court 
of  justice."  67 

14.  Penal  Provisions.  All  the  States  impose  penalties  for 
illegal  voting68  at  caucuses  and  primaries,  and  most  of  them 
also  for  neglect  of  duty  and  wilful  fraud  on  the  part  of  primary 
and  caucus  officers,69  for  direct  or  indirect  bribery,  and  for 
kindred  offences.  The  maximum  penalty  varies  greatly  in 
the  laws  of  different  States,  ranging  all  the  way  from  $50  fine 
for  fraudulent  voting  in  Mississippi  to  $1,000  for  the  same 
offence  in  Michigan;  and  from  three  months'  imprisonment 
for  bribery  in  Mississippi  to  seven  years  for  the  same  offence 

65  The  secretary  of  the  primary  is  required  to  open  the  ballot-box  in  the  pres- 
ence of  the  watchers,  who  are  also  allowed  to  be  present  at  the  counting  of  the 
votes. 

66  This  is  the  clause  which  made  a  similar  provision  nugatory  in  the  Democratic 
caucuses  in  Boston.    The  chairman  always  declares  that  the  motion  to  "  dispense 
with  the  ballot "  is  carried.     The  only  remedy  is  to  make  a  ballot  absolutely  com- 
pulsory at  the  request  of  a  certain  number  of  voters. 

67  Chapter  32,  1st  session  1891,  Sec.  7  ;  Primary  Registration  and  Election  Laws 
of  the  State  of  Wyoming  (Cheyenne,  1891),  5. 

58  This  includes  voting  by  those  not  members  of  the  party  holding  the  caucus  of 
primary,  or  who  are  not  qualified  under  the  party  rules. 

69  This  includes  any  violation  of  the  State  law  or  of  the  party  rules. 


1 88  REGULA TION  BY  LAW.  [CHAP.  IX. 

in  California.     In  several  of  the  States  the  penal  provisions 
apply  to  conventions  as  well  as  to  primaries.60 

In  addition  to  the  general  provisions  for  the  punishment  of 
fraud  and  bribery,  New  York  punishes  any  attempt  to  induce 
the  officers  of  a  primary  to  neglect  or  violate  their  duty.61 
New  Jersey  imposes  a  penalty  on  judges  of  primary  elections 
acting  before  taking  the  required  oath.62  West  Virginia  makes 
it  a  crime  to  employ  "workers"  at  the  polls.68  California 
applies  the  corrupt  practices  provisions  of  her  ballot  law  to 
primaries  and  conventions.64  New  Jersey66  and  Oregon66 
make  it  a  crime  for  the  officers  of  a  primary  to  refuse  to 
receive  the  vote  of  a  duly-qualified  voter.  Mississippi  requires 
the  saloons  to  be  closed  during  the  time  that  the  polls  are 

•°  The  stringent  character  of  some  of  these  laws  may  be  seen  by  an  extract  from 
the  Pennsylvania  act  of  1883,  which  is  entitled  "  An  Act  to  prevent  Bribery  and 
Fraud  at  Nominating  Elections,  Nomination  Conventions,  Returning  Boards, 
County  or  Executive  Committees,  and  at  Elections  of  Delegates  to  Nominating 
Conventions  in  the  several  Counties  of  this  Commonwealth." 

Section  one  of  this  act  provides  as  follows :  "  Hereafter,  if  a  candidate  for  any 
office  within  this  Commonwealth  shall  directly  or  indirectly  give,  offer,  or  promise 
to  give,  or  procure  any  other  person  to  give,  offer,  or  promise  to  give  to  any  elector, 
any  gift  or  reward,  in  money,  goods,  or  other  valuable  thing,  or  any  office,  emolu- 
ment or  employment  on  condition  expressed  or  implied,  that  such  elector  shall 
cast,  give,  retain,  or  withhold  his  vote,  or  use  his  influence  at  a  nominating  election, 
or  delegate  election,  or  cast,  give,  or  substitute  another  to  cast  or  give  his  vote  or 
use  his  influence  at  a  nominating  convention  for  or  against  the  nomination  of  any 
particular  candidate  for  nomination,  so  as  to  procure  such  person  to  be  voted  for 
at  any  election  to  take  place,  the  person  so  hiring,  procuring,  influencing,  abetting, 
endeavoring,  or  offering  either  directly  or  indirectly  through  others,  their  aiders  or 
abettors,  to  procure  the  person  to  be  voted  for  by  such  electors,  shall  be  guilty  of 
a  misdemeanor,  and  on  conviction  shall  be  sentenced  to  pay  a  fine  not  exceeding 
three  hundred  dollars  and  be  imprisoned  for  a  period  not  exceeding  three  months." 
There  are  five  other  sections  couched  in  similar  language,  imposing  penalties  for 
the  acceptance  of  a  bribe,  for  a  voter  offering  to  sell  his  vote,  for  "  repeating  and 
other  forms  of  fraudulent  voting  and  for  similar  acts  by  delegates  to  nominating 
conventions  and  members  of  party  committees."  (Act  of  June,  1883  —  Brightley- 
Purdon,  Digest  of  the  Laws  of  Pennsylvania  (Philadelphia,  1885),  I.  466,  467.) 

81  Penal  Code,  Sec.  41. 

M  General  Public  Laws  (1884),  chapter  211,  Sec.  2. 

83  Acts  of  1890,  chapter  16,  Sec.  2;  Acts  of  Legislature  of  West  Virginia  at 
Nineteenth  Annual  Session  and  Extra  Session  of  1890,  176. 

•*  Acts  of  1893,  chapter  16,  Sec.  n. 

66  Acts  of  1884,  chapter  211,  Sec.  2. 

M  Act  of  1891,  Sec.  12;  Election  Laws  (1891),  55. 


SECT.  1 5-]    RELATIVE  TO  NOMINATING  CONVENTIONS.    189 

open  at  primary  elections.67  Finally,  Pennsylvania  has  a 
special  law  which  applies  to  primary  as  well  as  to  regular 
elections,  providing  that  "any  person  who  shall  furnish  or 
supply  to  any  elector  of  this  commonwealth  at  any  of  the 
polls  or  voting  places,  any  ballot  or  ticket  falsely  represent- 
ing it  to  contain  names  not  thereon,  with  the  intent  and  pur- 
pose of  defrauding  said  voter  out  of  his  expressed  choice,  shall 
be  deemed  guilty  of  a  misdemeanor,  and,  on  conviction,  shall 
pay  a  fine  not  to  exceed  one  hundred  dollars,  or  imprisonment 
not  to  exceed  one  year,  one  or  both,  or  either,  at  the  discre- 
tion of  the  court."68  This  severe  provision  was  undoubtedly 
intended  to  prevent  the  practice  sometimes  resorted  to  of 
preparing  a  ticket  of  delegates  in  every  respect  similar  to 
another  well-known  ticket,  except  that  one  or  two  names  in 
the  list  are  changed,  the  alteration  being  so  little  noticeable 
that  the  average  voter  would  never  suspect  the  shrewd  trick  of 
which  he  was  the  victim.69 

15.  Provisions  Relative  to  Nominating  Conventions.  With  the 
exception  of  certain  of  the  penal  provisions  against  fraud  and 
bribery,  which  apply  to  all  meetings  for  the  nomination  of 
candidates  for  public  office,  most  of  the  States  have  no  statu- 
tory regulations  governing  nominating  conventions. 

In  Massachusetts,  there  is  a  provision  that  with  the  excep- 
tion of  the  nomination  of  candidates  for  the  Lower  House  of 
the  legislature,  or  for  city  and  town  officers,  "no  nomination 
of  a  candidate  to  be  voted  for  in  an  electoral  district  or 
division  containing  more  than  one  town  or  more  than  one 
ward  of  a  city  shall  be  made  by  a  caucus."70  This  makes 
the  convention  system  compulsory  in  nominations  for  all  other 
offices. 

North  Dakota,  in  1890,  passed  an  act  for  the  "Regulation 
of  the  Use  of  Proxies  in  Conventions,"  which  is  interesting 
as  being  the  first  attempt,  so  far  as  the  writer  has  been  able 
to  ascertain,  at  remedying  by  statute  law  an  evil  which  fre- 

67  Chapter  104,  of  Annotated  Code,  Sec.  19. 

68  Act  of  June  13,  1883  ;  Public  Laws  (1883),  92. 

69  This  device  has  been  used  in  the  caucuses  in  Cambridge,  Mass. 

70  Chapter  417,  of  the  Acts  of  1893,  Sec-  71  '•>  Election  Laws  (1893),  28. 


190  REGULATION  BY  LAW.  [CHAP.  IX. 

quently  occurs  at  nominating  conventions.71  The  evil  consists 
in  the  procuring  by  the  machine  politicians  of  the  credentials 
of  absent  delegates,  or  of  delegates  who  leave  before  the  con- 
vention is  over,  and  using  them  for  their  own  ends.  It  fre- 
quently happens  that  two  or  three  shrewd  politicians  are 
enabled,  by  the  proxies  in  their  possession,  absolutely  to  con- 
trol the  proceedings  of  a  convention.  The  North  Dakota  Act 
makes  it  unlawful  "for  any  person  to  use  or  attempt  to  use 
the  proxy  of  any  delegate  elected  to  any  state,  district,  or 
county  convention,  of  a  political  character,  unless  he  holds 
his  legal  residence  within  the  same  political  sub-division 
which  is  recognized  as  the  unit  of  representation  in  the  con- 
vention in  which  the  proxy  is  used  or  sought  to  be  used."73 
Under  this  law,  no  person  can  use  the  proxy  of  more  than  one 
delegate. 

The  Mississippi  law,  however,  is  the  only  one  which  regu- 
lates to  any  extent  the  calling  and  organization  of  nominating 
conventions.  It  provides  that  delegates  to  a  State  convention 
shall  be  chosen  throughout  the  State  on  the  same  day,  and  the 
same  provision  is  made  in  regard  to  all  district  conventions.73 
This  is  an  eminently  wise  provision,  and  ought  to  be  univer- 
sally adopted.74  Its  object  is  to  prevent  the  action  of  the 
caucuses  or  primary  elections  in  one  locality  from  affecting, 
in  any  way,  the  action  of  the  caucuses  or  elections  in  other 
districts.  Where  there  are  several  contestants  for  a  nomina- 
tion, as  almost  always  happens  in  the  case  of  the  nomination 
of  a  candidate  for  governor  or  congressman  by  the  majority 
party  in  a  State,  the  managers  of  the  different  aspirants  for 
the  nomination  direct  their  energies,  at  the  outset,  to  those 

71  It  will  be  remembered  that  the  Rules  of  the  Republican  party  of  Philadelphia 
remedy  the  evil  by  prohibiting  the  use  of  proxies  altogether.  See  ante,  chapter 
viii.  §  12.  The  Massachusetts  Caucus  Act  of  1895  provides  that  in  the  case  of  a 
vacancy  in  a  delegation,  the  remainder  of  the  delegation  shall  fill  the  vacancy,  thus 
doing  away  with  proxies  altogether. 

n  Laws  of  1890,  chapter  12,  Sec.  i.    Election  Laws  (1891),  51. 

71  Annotated  Code  of  Statute  Laws,  chapter  104,  Sec.  4. 

74  This  provision  was  at  first  incorporated  into  the  Massachusetts  Act  of  1894, 
but  was  subsequently  modified  so  that  caucuses  for  the  choice  of  delegates  to  a 
State  convention  must  be  chosen  on  one  of  two  consecutive  days. 


SECT.  1 5-]    RELATIVE  TO  NOMINATING  CONVENTIONS,    igi 

places  choosing  their  delegates  first,  in  order  to  get  the  moral 
advantage  of  a  victory  in  the  preliminary  skirmish.  Moreover, 
as  place  after  place  chooses  its  delegates,  the  battle  between 
the  contending  factions  becomes  hotter  and  hotter,  and  every 
effort  is  made  to  carry  the  remaining  caucuses  and  elections. 
Such  a  state  of  things  is  demoralizing  to  the  party  as  well  as 
to  the  community  at  large.  This  was  long  ago  recognized  in 
the  case  of  regular  elections,  and  in  every  State  in  the  Union 
the  law  requires  these  to  be  held  throughout  the  State  on  the 
same  day.  Precisely  the  same  reason  exists  for  a  similar  pro- 
vision in  regard  to  nominations. 

The  Mississippi  law  also  requires  that  at  least  42  days' 
notice  shall  be  given  of  a  State  convention,  while  a  notice  of 
36,  30,  and  20  days,  respectively,  is  required  for  congressional 
district  and  county,  or  minor  conventions.75  The  object  of 
the  provision  is  to  prevent  "snap  conventions,"  such  as  have 
occurred  in  New  York  State.76  It  is  further  provided  that  all 
conventions  shall  be  held  some  time  between  July  ist  and 
September  ist.  Each  county  is  allowed  to  determine  the 
method  of  selecting  its  delegates,  but  the  method  adopted 
must  be  "fair  and  equitable,"  and  such  regulations  must  be 
adopted  "as  will  ascertain  the  will  of  the  majority  of  the 
party."  The  executive  committee  is  expressly  forbidden  to 
"gerrymander"  the  State  or  district.  It  is  provided  that 
"each  precinct  or  district  in  a  county  shall  have  fair  and 
equitable  representation  in  county  meetings  or  conventions," 
and  that  "when  there  is  a  difference  of  opinion  or  choice 
among  members  of  the  party  in  any  such  precincts  or  districts 
as  to  candidates  or  delegates,  each  faction  shall  have  its  pro- 
portion of  representation  in  the  county  meeting  or  convention." 
It  is  evident  that  we  have  here  the  principle  of  proportional 
representation  carried  out  in  the  nomination  of  candidates, 
although  it  has  not,  as  yet,  been  applied  to  the  regular 
elections. 

The  law  further  fixes,  absolutely,  the  basis  of  apportion- 
ment, —  a  matter  which  everywhere  else  is  left  entirely  to  the 

75  §5- 

76  See  ante,  chapter  v.  §  14 ;  also  chapter  vi.  §  4. 


192  REGULATION  BY  LAW.  [CHAP.  IX. 

party  organization.  In  every  convention  each  county  is 
entitled  to  twice  as  many  delegates  as  it  has  members  in  the 
Lower  House  of  the  legislature.  Finally,  every  convention 
is  required  to  "  prorate  "  the  votes  of  the  delegates  so  as  "  to 
represent,  as  nearly  as  practicable,  the  popular  vote  cast  in 
the  primary  election,"  —  a  further  application  of  the  principle 
of  proportional  representation.77 

1 6.  The  Massachusetts  Act  of  1894.  As  has  already  been 
stated,78  it  was  not  until  1888  that  Massachusetts  passed  an 
act  regulating  party  nominations.  The  main  provisions  of 
this  act,  which  did  not  do  much  more  than  give  the  party 
caucus  legal  standing,  have  already  been  given  in  the  descrip- 
tion of  the  Wyoming  act.79  The  reason  for  this  lack  of  statu- 
tory regulation  is  to  be  found  in  the  fact  that,  as  a  rule,  party 
caucuses  and  conventions  in  Massachusetts  have  been  free 
from  the  evils  which  have  been  so  frequent  and  so  glaring  in 
other  States.  In  the  city  of  Boston,  however,  as  has  already 
been  shown,80  fraud  and  violence  have  been  of  frequent  occur- 
rence in  the  caucuses  of  the  Democratic  party.  Stimulated 
by  the  example  of  the  Republican  party,  which,  in  1890, 
adopted  the  admirable  set  of  rules  which  have  already  been 
described,  repeated  attempts  at  caucus  reform  within  the 
party  were  made  by  prominent  Democrats.  All  of  these 
attempts  being  unsuccessful,  appeal  was  at  last  made  to  the 
State  for  legislation  to  compel  the  Democratic  city  committee 
to  give  the  rank  and  file  of  the  Democratic  voters  fair  and 
honest  caucuses.  As  a  result  of  this  agitation,  the  House  of 
Representatives  of  1893  appointed  a  special  committee  to  sit 
during  the  recess  to  examine  into  the  operation  of  the  Act  of 
1888,  and  "to  consider  and  report  whether  any  further  amend- 
ments of  said  act  are  necessary  or  any  further  legislation  on 
the  same  subject."  This  committee  held  public  hearings 
during  the  summer  and  fall,  and,  as  a  result  of  their  labors, 
reported  the  draft  of  a  new  caucus  act  to  the  Legislature  of 
1894,  by  which  it  was  referred  to  the  Committee  on  Election 

77  §  17.    Mississippi  Acts  of  1890,  ch.  12. 

78  §  i  of  the  present  chapter. 

79  §  13.  *>  See  ante,  chapter  v.  §  13. 


SECT.  1 6.]      THE  MASSACHUSETTS  ACT  OF  1894.  193 

Laws,  of  which  the  writer  was  a  member.  This  committee 
also  held  public  hearings  upon  the  subject  of  caucus  reform, 
and,  using  the  evidence  given  at  the  hearings,  the  sugges- 
tions of  the  Recess  Committee  and  of  the  Election  Laws 
League,  reported  a  bill  which  was  subsequently  enacted  into 
law.  In  framing  the  bill  the  committee  had  two  objects  in 
view :  in  the  first  place,  to  leave  as  much  control  as  possible 
in  the  hands  of  the  party;  and,  in  the  second  place,  to  take 
into  account  the  widely-different  conditions  prevailing  in  the 
urban  and  rural  sections  of  the  State.  Inasmuch  as  this  law  is 
one  of  the  most  recent  pieces  of  legislation  upon  the  subject, 
and  because  of  the  time  and  thought  spent  in  its  construction, 
it  may  be  well  to  consider  its  provisions  somewhat  in  detail. 

The  act,  as  originally  passed,  contained  three  main  features : 
ist,  certain  general  provisions  applicable  to  the  entire  State; 
2d,  certain  special  provisions  applicable  only  to  the  city  of 
Boston;  and  3d,  the  application  of  these  special  provisions 
to  the  caucuses  of  a  party  in  any  city  or  town,  provided  a 
majority  of  the  party  voters  in  that  city  or  town  so  determine. 
The  Legislature  of  1895,  however,  after  making  certain  per- 
fecting amendments  in  the  light  of  one  year's  experience, 
divided  the  act  into  two  separate  acts,  one  containing  the 
general  provisions  applicable  to  the  whole  State,  and  the  other 
the  special  provisions  compulsory  in  Boston,  but  optional  in 
the  rest  of  the  State.81 

The  most  important  general  provisions  may  be  summarized 
as  follows : 

(1)  Each  political  party  in  a  city  or  town  which  holds  cau- 
cuses for  the  nomination  of  candidates  is  required  each  year 
to  elect  a  city  or  town  committee,  and  certain  general  pro- 
visions are  laid  down  for  the  organization  and  government  of 
such  committees.     There  are  also  similar  provisions  in  regard 
to  State  and  district  committees. 

(2)  All  caucuses  of  a  political  party  for  the  choice  of  dele- 
gates to  the  various  conventions  (except  State  representative 
conventions)  must  be  held  throughout  the  commonwealth  on 

81  The  text  of  the  law,  as  contained  in  these  two  acts  passed  in  1895,  will  be 
found  in  Appendix  G. 

13 


I94  REGULATION  BY  LAW.  [CHAP.  IX. 

one  of  two  consecutive  days,82  and  all  such  delegates  must  be 
chosen  at  one  caucus.  The  same  provision  is  made  in  regard 
to  representative  conventions  and  caucuses. 

(3)  At  least  seven  days'  notice  must  be  given  of  all  cau- 
cuses.    The  notice  must  state  exactly  when  and  where  the 
caucus  is  to  be  held,  and  copies  of  the  notice  must  be  con- 
spicuously posted  in  at  least  five  places  "on  lines  of  public 
travel."     The  polls  shall  be  kept  open  at  least  thirty  minutes, 
and,    in   balloting,   the  voting  lists   last  certified  to  by  the 
registrars  of  voters  shall  be  used. 

(4)  No  person  who  has  voted  at  the  caucus  of  one  party  can 
vote  at  the  caucus  of  another  party  during  the  same  calendar 
year.     Each  city  or  town  committee  is  allowed  to  make  such 
rules  as  are  consistent  with  the  act,  to  prevent   members  of 
other  parties  from  voting  at  its  caucuses. 

(5)  A  plurality  vote  is  sufficient  for  the  election  of  a  dele- 
gate or  for  the  nomination  of  a  candidate.     In  the  case  of  a 
tie  vote  for  a  delegate  to  a  convention,  or  for  a  city  or  town  com- 
mittee, those  members  of  the  delegation  or  committee  who  are 
elected,  are  empowered,  under  certain  regulations,  to  fill  the 
vacancy.     In  case  of  a  tie  vote  for  candidates  for  an  elective 
office,  another  caucus  must  be  held,  if  a  single  voter  objects  to 
another  ballot  being  taken  the  same  evening. 

(6)  At   the   request   of  the   city  or  town   committee,   the 
authorities  of  cities  and  towns  are  required  to  furnish  polling 
places  for  the  holding  of  caucuses. 

(7)  On  the  written  request  of  ten  qualified  voters,  the  secre- 
tary of  the  caucus  is  obliged  to  keep  the  voting  lists  and 
ballots,  and  must  produce  them  if  called  for  by  any  court  of 
justice, — a  precaution  against   fraudulent   counting.     Provi- 
sion is  also  made  for  a  recount  of  the  votes  cast  at  the  caucus 
under  certain  conditions. 

(8)  Each  political  party  is  allowed  to  make  and  enforce  any 
further  regulations  not  inconsistent  with  the  act. 

w  Some  members  of  the  committee  were  anxious  to  have  all  the  caucuses  for  the 
election  of  delegates  to  the  same  convention  held  on  the  same  day,  but  the  members 
from  the  country  districts  objected  on  the  ground  that  something  might  occur  to 
keep  the  voters  away  on  the  day  appointed  by  the  State  committee. 


SECT.  17.]    LEGISLATION  IN  THE  BOSTON  CAUCUSES.      195 

17.    Massachusetts  Legislation  in  the  Boston   Caucuses.      The 

provisions  of  the  law  which  are  limited  in  their  compulsory 
application  to  the  city  of  Boston,  are  very  similar  in  their 
general  character  to  the  Rules  of  the  Republican  City  Com- 
mittee of  that  city  which  have  been  described  in  the  preced- 
ing chapter.  The  main  feature  is  the  application  of  the 
Australian  ballot  system  to  the  organization  and  conduct  of 
caucuses,  with  the  usual  provisions  for  the  filing  of  nomination 
papers,  the  withdrawal  of  candidates,  the  filling  of  vacancies, 
the  preparation  and  form  of  official  and  sample  ballots,  etc. 

In  one  respect,  these  provisions  differ  in  character  from  the 
provisions  of  the  general  election  law  of  the  State :  it  is  pro- 
vided that  the  names  of  the  delegates  to  a  convention  may  be 
arranged  by  groups  instead  of  alphabetically,  —  a  single  cross 
placed  in  the  upper  right-hand  corner  of  the  group  being 
counted  as  a  vote  for  each  member  of  the  group. 

The  question,  who  should  conduct  the  caucuses  in  Boston, 
was  a  very  puzzling  one  to  the  committee.  The  first  idea 
of  the  committee  was  to  place  the  conduct  of  the  caucus  in 
the  hands  of  the  ward  committee,  as  is  provided  in  the  Boston 
Republican  Rules.  The  testimony  of  leading  Democrats, 
however,  showed,  conclusively,  that  such  a  provision  would 
work  badly  in  the  caucuses  of  that  party,  for  the  reason  that 
it  would  leave  the  control  of  nominations  where  it  always  had 
been,  in  the  hands  of  the  machine.  By  some  it  was  suggested 
that  the  caucus  officers  should  be  appointed  by  the  city 
authorities,  as  in  the  case  of  precinct  officers  at  regular  elec- 
tions. This  plan,  however,  would  involve  the  destruction  of 
party  self-government,  —  a  result  which  the  committee  were 
anxious,  as  far  as  possible,  to  avoid.  The  plan  finally  adopted 
by  the  committee  was  to  have  the  city  committee  appoint 
officers  at  the  first  caucuses  held  under  the  act.  Then,  at 
this  first  caucus  in  each  ward,  and  in  every  subsequent  year 
at  the  caucus  held  for  the  choice  of  delegates  to  the  State  and 
councillor  conventions,  the  party  voters  of  the  ward  are  to 
choose  a  warden,  a  clerk,  and  five  inspectors,  who  shall  have 
charge  of  the  party  caucus  in  that  ward.  These  officers  may, 
by  a  majority  vote,  choose  additional  officers  to  assist  them  in 


REGULATION  BY  LAW.  [CHAP.  IX. 

holding  any  caucus.  They  are  also  empowered  to  fill  vacan- 
cies in  their  own  number.  In  order  still  further  to  guard 
against  "machine  rule,"  it  is  provided  that  "no  person  shall 
be  eligible  to  the  position  of  warden  or  clerk  who  is  a  mem- 
ber of  the  ward  committee,  and  no  person  shall  serve  as  a  cau- 
cus officer  who  is  a  candidate  for  an  elective  office  or  candidate 
for  ward  committee."88 

All  of  the  provisions  just  described  are  compulsory  upon  all 
party  caucuses  held  in  the  city  of  Boston.  Inasmuch  as  there 
had  been  no  demand  for  caucus  legislation  outside  of  Boston, 
and  one  or  two  other  cities,  it  was  thought  unwise,  by  the 
committee,  to  make  these  provisions  compulsory  upon  the  rest 
of  the  State.  At  the  same  time,  it  was  evident  there  should 
be  some  provision  for  applying  the  provisions  in  question  to 
any  city  or  town  where  a  majority  of  the  party  voters  so 
desired.  If,  however,  the  question  of  their  adoption  was  left 
to  the  party  committee,  experience  here  and  elsewhere  has 
plainly  shown  that  the  new  requirements  would  not  be  adopted. 
Accordingly,  the  act  provides  that  in  any  city  "the  city  com- 
mittee of  any  political  party  shall,  at  the  request  of  fifty 
voters,  members  of  said  party,  call  a  caucus  or  caucuses  of 
said  party  for  the  purpose  of  voting  upon  the  question  whether 
the  provisions  of  this  act,  as  applied  to  the  methods  of  hold- 
ing caucuses  in  the  city  of  Boston,  shall  be  adopted  by  said 
political  party  in  said  city."  Provision  is  also  made  for  full 
and  proper  notice  being  given  of  the  time  and  place  of  hold- 
ing the  caucuses  for  this  purpose.  In  case  a  majority  of  the 
party  voters  in  any  city  vote  to  adopt  the  Boston  provisions, 
the  new  requirements  must  remain  in  force  at  least  one  year. 
At  the  end  of  that  time,  however,  the  party  voters  may,  at 
caucuses  held  for  that  purpose  and  properly  advertised,  revoke 
their  action,  provided  two-thirds  of  those  present  and  voting 
so  determine.  The  act  contains  a  similar  provision  in  regard 


w  The  act  also  specifies  the  order  of  business  which  shall  be  followed  at  caucuses 
in  Boston,  and  regulates  the  conduct  of  the  caucus  from  the  opening  of  the  polls 
until  the  close  of  the  count.  In  addition,  it  is  provided  that  the  regular  election 
laws  of  the  State  are  applicable  to  the  Boston  caucuses,  unless  otherwise  specified. 


SECT.  1 8.]    PRACTICAL  EFFECT  OF  LEGISLATION.  197 

to  the  acceptance  of  these  provisions  by  the  voters  of  any  party 
in  any  town. 

1 8.  Practical  Effect  of  Legislation.  We  have  now  considered 
the  general  nature  of  the  laws  enacted  by  the  different  States 
for  the  regulation  of  party  nominations.  Into  the  details  of 
the  practical  working  of  these  laws  it  is  needless  to  enter. 
That  the  laws  have  not  been  enforced  in  New  York  and  in 
other  States  is  undoubtedly  true,  and  is  certainly  to  be 
regretted.  The  same  is  true,  however,  of  the  laws  governing 
the  regular  elections  in  those  States.  But  wherever  a  neces- 
sity has  arisen  for  legislative  interference,  the  honest  enforce- 
ment of  such  laws  as  have  been  described,  has  accomplished 
much  in  the  way  of  better  nominations.8*  The  laws  passed 
in  the  different  States  to  meet  particular  needs  are,  without 
exception,  good  laws,  and  ought  to  be  rigorously  enforced. 
Whether  they  will  be  enforced  depends,  as  in  the  case  of  all 
laws,  upon  the  efficiency  of  the  government  authorities  and 
the  strength  of  public  opinion.  As  has  already  been  stated, 
the  details  of  the  nominating  machinery,  in  any  particular 
region,  should  be  left  as  far  as  possible  to  the  party  voters 
themselves;  but  where  experience  has  plainly  demonstrated 
the  futility  of  other  means,  the  strong  arm  of  the  law  should 
be  called  in,  in  the  interest  of  good  government,  to  help  those 
who  are  either  unable  or  unwilling  to  help  themselves. 

In  closing,  it  is  to  be  noted  that  statutory  regulation  as  a 
remedy  for  the  evil  of  bad  nominations,  just  as  the  remedy  of 

84  The  Massachusetts  Caucus  Act  has,  on  the  whole,  been  well  enforced,  and  the 
result  has  been  very  encouraging.  For  instance,  in  June  of  the  present  year  (1896), 
the  warden  of  one  of  the  Democratic  caucuses  in  Boston  was  sentenced  to  a  term 
in  the  House  of  Correction  for  a  violation  of  the  provisions  of  the  law  intended  to 
secure  a  fair  and  honest  conduct  of  party  caucuses.  There  is  still,  however,  com- 
plaint as  to  the  conduct  of  the  caucuses  in  Boston.  A  committee  has  been  appointed 
by  the  legislature  to  investigate,  during  the  present  summer,  the  condition  of  the 
Boston  caucuses,  and  to  suggest  to  the  next  legislature  such  further  changes  in  the 
Caucus  Act  as  they  may  think  advisable.  The  chief  ground  of  complaint  appears 
to  be  that,  in  spite  of  the  legal  provisions  described  above,  the  machine  has  been 
able  to  get  control  of  the  "rail"  and  thus  to  count  in  the  machine  candidates. 
There  remains  the  remedy  of  placing  the  receipt  and  count  of  the  ballots  at  all  the 
ward  caucuses  in  the  hands  of  the  regular  election  officers.  This  arrangement, 
besides  insuring  an  honest  count,  would  make  it  easy  to  prevent  voters  from  taking 
part  m  more  than  one  party  caucus. 


198  REGULATION  BY  LAW.  [CHAP.  IX. 

party  rules,  has  its  limitations.  The  law  can  prevent  "snap" 
caucuses  and  conventions  by  requiring  proper  notice  to  be 
given  of  all  such  party  meetings;  it  can  secure  fair  and  honest 
conduct  of  caucuses  and  primary  elections;  in  short,  it  can 
bring  it  about  that  the  persons  nominated  by  party  caucuses 
and  conventions  shall  be  the  real  choice  of  the  party  voters 
present  at  the  primary  meetings;  but  it  cannot  prevent  the 
voters  who  are  present  and  vote  at  the  party  primaries  from 
nominating  unfit  candidates  for  office.  The  law  can  do  much, 
but  it  can  neither  compel  the  so-called  "  respectable  "  voters 
to  attend  the  caucuses  of  their  party;  nor  can  it  elevate  the 
moral  sense  of  those  who  do  attend.  The  only  method  of 
accomplishing  either  of  these  most  desirable  ends  is  by  edu- 
cating the  voting  population  of  the  country  up  to  a  true 
conception  of  the  duties  and  responsibilities  of  American 
citizenship. 


CHAPTER   X. 

SUPERVISION   BY   CITIZENS'   ASSOCIATIONS: 
CONCLUSION. 

I.  Difficulty  of  Enforcing  Laws.  It  is  a  comparatively  easy 
matter  to  adopt  rules  and  to  enact  laws ;  it  is  more  difficult  to 
secure  their  thorough  enforcement ;  and  nowhere  is  this  better 
illustrated  than  in  the  case  of  nominations.  The  State  of 
New  York,  for  instance,  has  laws  upon  its  statute  books  gov- 
erning the  conduct  of  the  party  primaries,  but  we  have  seen 
that  in  New  York  city  at  least  these  laws  are  a  dead  letter.1 
With  Tammany  in  full  control  of  the  municipal  police  force, 
this  state  of  affairs  was  scarcely,  perhaps,  to  be  wondered  at ; 
but,  in  any  case,  the  execution  of  the  laws  is  in  the  hands  of 
politicians,  and  the  extent  of  such  execution  must  depend  upon 
the  character  of  those  holding  elective  office.  Moreover,  the 
fact  that  the  law  must,  in  most  cases,  be  invoked  by  the 
defeated  candidate  or  his  friends  is  in  itself  an  obstacle  in 
the  way  of  such  invocation.  For  such  a  procedure  is  likely 
to  be  attributed  to  the  chagrin  of  defeat ;  further  it  may  bring 
the  party  organization  into  disrepute,  and  thus  injure  the 
chances  of  party  success  at  the  polls.  Therefore  defeated  can- 
didates are  deterred  from  resorting  to  legal  proceedings  by 
the  fear  of  losing  party  standing. 

The  enforcement  of  party  rules  and  statutory  regulations 
relative  to  nominations  must  depend,  as  in  the  case  of  all 
laws,  on  the  sentiment  of  fairness  among  the  people;  i.e., 
upon  the  strength  of  public  opinion.  But  "public  opinion" 
without  organization  is  merely  a  vague  term,  and  as  such  has 
no  terrors  for  the  professional  politicians.  The  latter  have, 

1  See  ante,  chapter  v.  §§  6  and  8. 


200    SUPERVISION  BY  CITIZENS'  ASSOCIATIONS.  [CHAP.X. 

from  the  very  beginning,  recognized  the  truth  of  the  old  adage, 
that  "  in  union  there  is  strength,"  and  have  acted  upon  it;  and 
the  friends  of  good  government,  if  they  desire  to  attain  any 
permanent  success,  must  adopt  the  same  method.  What  is 
needed  is  the  intelligent  organization  of  all  public-spirited 
citizens,  — a  crystallization  of  the  public  opinion  of  the  com- 
munity into  an  effective  force  which  those  intrusted  with  the 
administration  of  the  laws  will  not  dare  to  ignore.  In  the 
present  chapter  we  shall  consider  such  associations  of  citizens 
and  their  influence  on  nominations  for  municipal  office. 

2.  Citizens'  Movements  and  Tickets.    The  divorce  of  national 
and  State  politics  from  local  affairs,  as  a  remedy  for  bad  nomi- 
nations, has  already  been  considered,  in  a  general  way,  in  a 
former  chapter.2    Such  a  separation  is  quite  common  in  New 
England;  and  citizens'  movements  and  "citizens'  tickets"  are 
frequently  met  with,  especially  in  the  smaller  cities  and  in  the 
towns.3     But   this  conduct  of   municipal  campaigns   on   local 
issues  rather  than  on  national  party  lines  is  comparatively  rare 
in  other  parts  of  the  country;  yet  it  is  certainly  a  long  step 
in  the  direction  of  good  city  government,  and  one  which,  with 
the   growth  of  public   sentiment,   bids  fair  to   be  gradually 
adopted  in  all  of  our  large  cities. 

Citizens'  movements,  especially  in  the  larger  cities,  often 
lack  permanence  and  coherence,  in  many  cases  partaking  more 
of  the  nature  of  sudden  outbursts  of  popular  indignation  at 
existing  mis-government,  than  of  the  calm  and  steady  flow  of 
a  healthy  public  sentiment.  They  may  be  divided  into  two 
classes,  —  (i)  temporary  associations  nominating  candidates 
of  their  own,  of  which  the  Philadelphia  "Committee  of  One 
Hundred"  and  the  New  York  "Committee  of  Seventy"  are 
types;  and  (2)  permanent  organizations  selecting  a  ticket  from 
the  candidates  already  nominated  by  the  regular  parties,  mak- 
ing nominations  of  their  own  only  in  cases  of  actual  necessity, 
of  which  latter  class  the  "Library  Hall  Association"  of 
Cambridge,  Mass.,  is  an  example. 

3.  The  Philadelphia  "  Committee  of  One  Hundred."     The  "  Com- 
mittee of  One  Hundred,"  an  example  of  the  class  of  temporary 

*  Chapter  vii.  §  13.  »  See  Appendix  B. 


SECT.  3.]     THE  "COMMITTEE  OF  ONE  HUNDRED."  2Ql 

associations,  was  organized  in  the  fall  of  1880,  as  a  result  of 
general  dissatisfaction  regarding  the  administration  of  the 
municipal  government,4  under  the  dictation  of  the  notorious 
"Gas  Ring."5  The  movement  received  its  inspiration  from 
the  election,  in  November,  of  the  Democratic  candidate  for 
city  comptroller  by  a  combination  of  the  better  elements  of 
both  parties  against  the  candidate  put  forward  by  the  county 
Republican  machine,  which,  up  to  that  time,  had  had  absolute 
control  of  the  municipal  government.  Inspired  by  this  suc- 
cess, a  few  days  after  the  election  a  mass  meeting  of  the 
Republican  merchants  of  the  city  voted  to  establish  a  com- 
mittee consisting  of  one  hundred  business  men,  to  take  charge 
of  the  work  of  municipal  reform. 

This  "Committee  of  One  Hundred"  met  in  December, 
1880,  and  adopted  a  constitution.  The  preamble  was  as 
follows : 

The  undersigned,  having  in  view  the  dangerous  extent  to  which 
municipal  evils  have  been  increasing  for  many  years  past,  hereby  form 
themselves  into  an  association  for  the  following  objects,  viz. : 

First,  —  To  maintain  the  purity  of  the  ballot. 

Second,  —  To  secure  the  nomination  and  election  of  a  better  class 
of  candidates  for  office. 

Third,  —  To  prosecute  and  bring  to  punishment  those  who  have 
been  guilty  of  election  frauds,  maladministration  of  office,  or  misap- 
propriation of  public  funds. 

Fourth,  —  To  prevent  objectionable  legislation  and  aid  in  procur- 
ing such  as  the  public  demands. 

Fifth,  —  To  advocate  and  promote  a  public  service  based  upon 
character  and  capability  only.6 

The  Committee  of  One  Hundred  was  a  "  close  "  body,  elect- 
ing its  own  members,  as  vacancies  occurred,  and  was  officially 
responsible  to  no  one.  The  constitution,  however,  contained 
rigid  requirements  in  regard  to  the  election  of  new  members ; 

*  Report  of  the  Work  of  the  Committee  of  One  Hundred  (Philadelphia,  1884),  4. 

*  For  a  short  history  of  the  Gas  Ring,  see  Bryce,  American   Commonwealth 
(2d  ed.),  II.  367-84. 

8  Articles  of  Association  of  the  Citizens'  Committee  of  One  Hundred,  adopted 
March  21,  iSSi,  Art.  4  (pamphlet  published  in  1883). 


202    SUPERVISION  BY  CITIZENS'  ASSOCIATIONS.  [CHAP.X. 

and  also  the  significant  provision  that  "no  person  holding  any 
important  office  of  emolument  under  the  National,  State,  or 
City  government,  nor  any  member  of  city  council,  shall  be 
eligible  for  membership;  and  any  member  becoming  a  can- 
didate for  any  of  these  offices,  shall  thereupon  cease  to  hold 
office  in  this  committee,  or  serve  on  any  of  its  sub-committees, 
and  upon  being  elected  shall  cease  to  be  a  member  of  the 
Committee."7 

Nominations  for  membership  were  required  to  be  made  in 
writing  to  the  executive  committee,  which  committee,  after 
"careful  examination  and  inquiry  as  to  fitness,"  was  to  report 
to  the  whole  Committee  of  One  Hundred  such  as  were 
approved.  Five  negative  votes  were  sufficient  to  defeat  a 
nomination  in  the  executive  committee,  and  a  three-fourths' 
vote  of  the  members  present  at  a  meeting  of  the  general  com- 
mittee was  required  to  elect  a  nominee  to  membership. 

Provision  was  also  made  for  the  appointment  of  certain 
sub-committees,  among  others  an  executive  committee,  a  cam- 
paign committee,  a  committee  on  ward  organization,  and  a 
committee  on  the  prosecution  of  frauds.8  The  executive  com- 
mittee, which  consisted  of  thirty  members,  also  appointed  sub- 
committees, among  which  may  be  mentioned  the  committee 
on  legislation  and  the  committee  on  municipal  abuses.9 

The  "Declaration  of  Principles,"  adopted  by  the  committee, 
advocated  civil  service  reform  for  all  municipal  offices,  and 
declared  that  the  "government  of  the  city  in  all  its  depart- 
ments should  be  a  model  of  efficiency  and  economy,"10  and 
that  to  this  end  municipal  affairs  should  be  conducted  on  busi- 
ness principles,  and  that  fitness,  and  not  party  allegiance, 
should  be  the  sole  test  for  office. 

A  full  account  of  the  excellent  work  done  by  the  committee 
on  the  prosecution  of  frauds  in  the  famous  Gas  Ring  suit, 
and  in  the  prosecution  of  election  frauds,  and  by  the  commit- 
tee on  legislation  in  securing  a  sweeping  reduction  in  the 

1  Ibid.,  Art.  II. 

8  Ibid.,  Art.  IV.  of  the  Constitution,  5,  6  (Pamphlet  of  1883). 

•  By-laws  of  the  Executive  Committee  of  the  Committee  of  One  Hundred,  15. 

M  Ibid.,  8. 


SECT.  3.]     THE  "  COMMITTEE  OF  ONE  HUNDRED."  203 

salaries  paid  to  city  and  county  officers,  may  be  found  in  the 
report  of  the  committee  published  in  1884.  What  concerns 
us  most  here  is  the  work  done  in  regard  to  the  nomination  of 
candidates. 

Immediately  after  its  organization  the  Committee  began 
the  campaign  for  the  municipal  election  to  be  held  in  February, 
1 88 1,  at  which  a  mayor,  a  receiver  of  taxes,  and  a  city  solicitor 
were  to  be  chosen.  The  Committee  of  One  Hundred  passed  a 
resolution  that  they  would  support  no  candidate  unless  he 
would  sign  the  "  Declaration  of  Principles "  already  referred 
to.  The  Republican  municipal  convention  nominated  Mr. 
Stokley  for  mayor,  and  the  Committee  of  One  Hundred,  which 
was  composed  entirely  of  Republicans,  indorsed  him ;  but 
when  it  was  discovered  that,  at  the  dictation  of  the  Gas  Ring, 
Mr.  Stokley  refused  to  sign  the  Declaration,  the  Committee 
withdrew  its  indorsement,  and  gave  the  Democratic  party  to 
understand  that  an  honest  and  capable  candidate,  nominated 
by  that  party,  would  receive  its  support.  Mr.  King  was  there- 
upon nominated,  against  the  wishes  of  the  machine  politicians, 
and  received  the  promised  indorsement.  For  the  important 
office  of  receiver  of  taxes,  the  Republican  convention  had 
nominated  an  unknown  man,  a  tool  of  the  Gas  Ring;  the 
Committee  of  One  Hundred  therefore  nominated  a  Republican 
candidate  of  their  own,  —  Mr.  Hunter.  A  vigorous  attempt 
by  the  better  element  of  the  Democratic  party  to  secure  an 
indorsement  of  Mr.  Hunter's  nomination  by  the  Democratic 
convention  having  failed,  the  Hunter  delegates  "bolted,"  and 
nominated  him  as  an  Independent  Democratic  candidate;  but, 
subsequently,  the  regular  Democratic  candidate  withdrew,  so 
that  the  contest  lay  between  the  "regular"  Republican  candi- 
date and  the  candidate  of  the  Committee  of  One  Hundred. 
After  a  very  exciting  campaign,  the  Committee  was  victori- 
ous; Mr.  King,  the  candidate  who  had  received  its  indorse- 
ment, was  elected  mayor  by  6,000  majority,  while  Hunter, 
their  own  candidate  for  receiver  of  taxes,  received  20,000 
majority  over  the  candidate  of  the  machine. 

As  a  result  of  this  victory,  the  Committee  was  enabled  to 
make  an  investigation  of  the  administration  of  the  city's 


204    SUPERVISION  BY  CITIZENS^  ASSOCIATIONS.  [CHAP.X. 

affairs  under  the  Gas  Ring,  and  discovered  an  appalling  con- 
dition of  fraud  and  corruption.  During  the  next  two  years 
the  Committee  indorsed  or  recommended  candidates  at  the 
November  and  February  elections  with  varying  success,  their 
method  being  to  send  to  every  voter  a  copy  of  their  "ticket," 
and  to  take  care  that  all  those  in  sympathy  with  them  voted 
on  election  day.  As  a  rule,  the  Committee's  efforts  were 
more  successful  when  they  indorsed  candidates  already  nomi- 
nated, than  when  they  recommended  candidates  of  their  own. 
Finally,  however,  in  1884,  all  the  candidates  recommended 
by  the  Committee  were  defeated  at  the  polls.  This  result  was 
due  partly  to  the  influence  of  national  issues  upon  the  election, 
and  partly  to  the  dislike  of  the  rank  and  file  of  the  party  voters 
for  the  dictation  of  a  select  and  self-perpetuating  oligarchy. 
As  a  result  of  this  defeat,  the  Committee  of  One  Hundred 
dissolved,  expressing  the  hope  that  the  officials  who  had  been 
elected  on  professions  of  reform  would  carry  out  their  pledges, 
and  give  the  city  an  honest  and  capable  administration.  The 
Committee,  in  its  last  report,  gave  notice  of  its  dissolution  in 
the  following  words: 

After  laboring  in  an  organization  in  which  political  sacrifices  have 
been  severe  and  personal  political  advantages  have  been  by  law  for- 
bidden, the  members  of  the  body  can  under  these  circumstances  with 
propriety  relinquish  these  gratuitous  efforts,  giving  to  the  new  officials, 
if  sincere,  every  possible  assistance  as  individuals,  while  the  unprece- 
dented success  which  the  independent  voters  have  attained  should 
encourage  them  to  assert  themselves  further,  until  a  fairly  honest  and 
business-like  management  of  the  city  shall  be  secured.11 

The  work  of  the  Philadelphia  Committee  of  One  Hundred 
offers  a  novel  and  effective  method  of  dealing  with  the  evils 
of  municipal  government.  Such  an  association,  however, 
ought  to  be  permanent.  The  great  trouble  with  the  Philadel- 
phia association  was  that  it  was  not  organized  on  a  sufficiently 
democratic  basis  to  retain  long  its  influence  in  a  democratic 
community  such  as  ours. 

U  Report  of  the  Work  of  the  Committee  of  One  Hundred  (Philadelphia,  1884),  4. 


SECT.  4.]  THE  COMMITTEE  OF  SEVENTY.  205 

4.  The  New  York  Committee  of  Seventy.  The  history  of  the 
events  leading  up  to  the  formation  of  the  Committee  of  Sev- 
enty, and  the  work  accomplished  by  that  remarkable  organi- 
zation in  New  York  city,  has  been  admirably  told  by  the 
leader  of  the  movement.12  For  our  purposes  a  brief  summary 
will  suffice. 

In  1892,  Dr.  Parkhurst  secured  the  appointment  of  a  legis- 
lative committee  to  investigate  the  condition  of  affairs  in 
New  York  city.  This  committee  is  commonly  known  as  the 
"Lexow  Committee,"  from  the  name  of  its  chairman.  As 
its  work  progressed,  new  evidences  of  corruption  were  con- 
stantly brought  to  light,  until,  by  the  close  of  the  summer  of 
1894,  the  people  of  New  York  city  were  at  length  aroused  to 
the  necessity  of  immediate  action.  The  Democratic  oppo- 
nents of  Tammany,  however,  were  divided  into  factions;  the 
Republican  party  was  also  far  from  being  united;  and  with 
more  than  one  reform  ticket  in  the  field,  Tammany  was  sure  to 
win  the  election. 

Under  these  circumstances,  a  call  was  issued  by  thirty-three 
prominent  men  for  a  meeting  of  citizens,  irrespective  of 
party,  to  be  held  at  Madison  Square  Garden  Concert  Hall, 
early  in  September.13  At  this  meeting,  which  was  attended  by 
several  hundred  citizens,  an  "Address  to  the  People  of  the 
City  of  New  York,  regardless  of  Party,"  was  drawn  up,  calling 
upon  the  citizens  "to  rise  above  partisanship  to  the  broad 
plane  of  citizenship  and  to  unite  in  an  earnest  demand  for  the 
nomination  and  election  of  fitting  candidates,  whatever  their 
national  party  affiliations,  and  to  form  a  citizens'  movement 
for  the  government  of  the  city  entirely  outside  of  party  politics, 
and  only  in  the  interest  of  efficiency,  economy,  and  public 
health,  comfort,  and  safety."  By  vote  of  the  meeting,  the 
chairman  appointed  a  committee  of  seventy  "with  full  power 
to  confer  with  other  anti-Tammany  organizations,  and  to  take 
such  action  as  may  be  necessary  to  further  the  objects  of  this 

12  See  Our  Fight  with  Tammany,  by  Rev.  Charles  H.  Parkhurst,  D.  D.  (N.  Y., 
1895). 

18  Among  the  signers  of  this  call  were  William  L.  Strong,  Charles  S.  Smith, 
and  Cornelius  Vanderbilt. 


206    SUPERVISION  BY  CITIZENS'  ASSOCIATIONS.  [CHAP.X. 

meeting  as  set  forth  in  the  call  therefor  and  the  address 
adopted  by  this  meeting."14 

This  "Committee  of  Seventy"  represented  every  shade  of 
opinion  in  national  politics  and  all  classes  of  people,  in 
which  respect  it  differed  widely  from  the  Philadelphia  Com- 
mittee of  One  Hundred.  An  executive  committee  and  a 
finance  committee  were  appointed,  care  again  being  taken  to 
give  representation  to  all  the  different  wings  of  the  reform 
movement.  The  committee  adopted  a  platform  in  which  they 
laid  down  the  fundamental  proposition  that  "the  economical, 
honest,  and  business-like  management  of  municipal  affairs  has 
nothing  to  do  with  questions  of  national  or  State  politics."  16 

The  executive  committee  appointed  a  sub-committee  to  con- 
fer with  the  representatives  of  the  regular  anti-Tammany 
organizations,  on  the  best  policy  to  secure  the  united  effort 
which  could  alone  insure  success.  Finally,  the  executive 
committee  nominated  candidates  for  the  offices  of  mayor, 
president  of  the  board  of  aldermen,  judge  of  the  superior 
court  of  the  city  of  New  York,  sheriff,  recorder,  and 
coroner.16  The  candidate  for  mayor  and  one  coroner  were 
Republicans,  all  the  rest  being  Democrats.  The  nominations 
thus  made  were  approved  by  the  whole  committee,  and  finally 
by  all  the  anti-Tammany  organizations.  The  campaign,  the 
management  of  which  was  in  the  hands  of  a  committee  com- 
posed of  the  members  of  the  executive  and  finance  committees, 
was  a  most  spirited  one  from  start  to  finish,  and  resulted  in  a 
victory  for  good  government.  All  the  committee's  candidates 
were  elected  by  majorities  ranging  from  45,000  to  55,ooo.17 

After  securing  the  passage  through  the  State  legislature  of 
certain  reforms  in  the  city  charter,  and  having  seen  the  wheels 
of  the  new  government  fairly  started,  the  Committee  of 
Seventy  dissolved  itself  in  June,  1895.  There  ought,  however, 

14  Our  Fight  with  Tammany,  259.  I*  ibid.,  260. 

w  Each  candidate  expressly  pledged  himself  to  be  bound  by  the  principles  of 
the  platform. 

17  World  Almanac,  1895,  4'6-  Previous  to  the  election,  paster  ballots,  with  the 
names  of  the  Committee's  candidates  in  combination  with  the  candidates  of  the 
regular  parties  for  State  offices,  were  sent  by  mail  to  the  voters,  and  were  also  dis- 
tributed at  the  polls  on  election  day,  by  members  of  the  good  government  clubs. 


SECT.  5.]         THE  LIBRARY  HALL  ASSOCIATION.  207 

to  be,  in  New  York  as  well  as  in  other  large  cities,  a  permanent 
organization  based  on  the  same  broad  and  liberal  lines. 

5.  The  Library  Hall  Association  of  Cambridge,  Massachusetts. 
In  the  city  of  Cambridge,  Massachusetts,  since  1867,  with  the 
exception  of  three  years,  nominations  for  municipal  office  have 
been  made  entirely  without  reference  to  national  politics.  In 
each  of  the  three  exceptional  years  the  candidate  receiving  a 
straight  party  nomination  obtained  a  non-partisan  nomination 
in  addition.  Caucuses  for  the  nomination  of  candidates  for 
municipal  office  have  been  sometimes  called  by  a  self-con- 
stituted committee  of  citizens,  but  more  commonly  by  the 
chairman  and  secretary  of  the  previous  year's  municipal  con- 
vention of  some  one  of  the  local  parties. 

Of  the  four  different  local  organizations  which  have  been 
formed  outside  of  national  party  lines,  the  "Temple  Hall 
Party,"  which  takes  its  name  from  the  meeting  place  of  its 
first  convention,  has  enjoyed  a  remarkable  degree  of  perma- 
nence, having  been  organized  in  the  early  seventies  by  citizens 
without  regard  to  national  politics.  The  "  Citizens'  Party" 
and  "People's  Party"  are  both  of  more  recent  origin  than  the 
"Temple  Hall  Party,"  and  lack  the  strength  and  coherence  of 
that  organization.  The  fact  that  Cambridge,  for  the  past 
twenty-seven  years,  has  enjoyed  a  non-partisan  municipal  gov- 
ernment, and  is  to-day,  by  impartial  observers,  considered  the 
best  governed  city  of  its  size  in  the  United  States,  affords  a 
fair  test  of  the  wisdom  and  effectiveness  of  the  absolute  sepa- 
ration of  national  and  State  politics  from  the  conduct  of  muni- 
cipal affairs,  as  a  remedy  for  the  evils  at  present  complained  of 
in  our  large  cities.18 

Coming  now  to  the  Library  Hall  Association,  it  may  be 
well  to  give  a  somewhat  detailed  history  of  its  organization  as 
illustrating  the  manner  in  which  such  movements  start.  In 
i889,19  a  number  of  the  citizens  of  one  of  the  wards,  being  dis- 

18  It  is  worthy  of  note,  that  for  State  and  national  elections  there  are  regular  city 
committees  of  both  the  Republican  and  Democratic  parties,  but  they  take  no  part 
in  municipal  elections,  the  municipal  campaigns  being  conducted  by  special  cam- 
paign committees  of  the  various  local  parties  mentioned  in  the  text. 

19  Previous  to  this  in  1884,  at  a  municipal  convention  of  the  Temple  Hall  Party, 
a  resolution  was  passed  "  that  a  committee  of  five  be  appointed  by  the  chair  to 


208    SUPERVISION  BY  CITIZENS*  ASSOCIATIONS.  [CHAP.  X. 

satisfied  with  the  candidates  for  the  Common  Council  nomi- 
nated by  the  Temple  Hall  party,  held  a  meeting  in  the  quarters 
formerly  occupied  by  the  Public  Library,  to  which  citizens  of 
other  parts  of  the  city  were  invited.20  This  meeting  appointed 
a  committee  of  three  from  each  of  the  five  wards  to  issue  invi- 
tations to  twenty  prominent  citizens  from  each  ward  to  attend 
another  meeting  for  the  purpose  of  presenting  an  independent 
citizens'  ticket  at  the  polls.  At  this  meeting  the  merits  of 
the  candidates  nominated  by  the  different  municipal  conven- 
tions, were  discussed,  and  an  aldermanic  ticket  indorsed. 
Also  the  delegations  from  the  different  wards  agreed  on 
common  council  tickets  for  their  respective  wards.  The  meet- 
ing also  nominated  a  campaign  committee,  consisting  of 
twenty-five  from  each  ward.  Cards  bearing  the  names  of  all  the 
candidates  indorsed  at  this  meeting  were  distributed  to  the 
voters  at  the  polls.  At  the  head  of  each  card  was  printed 
the  question,  "  Will  you  help  us  to  secure  good  government  by 
voting  for  the  following  candidates?"  As  a  result  of  the 
election,  9  out  of  the  10  candidates  for  aldermen,  and  18  out 
of  the  20  candidates  for  the  common  council,  presented  by  the 
Library  Hall  meeting,  were  elected.  There  was  no  contest 
for  mayor. 

Encouraged  by  this  remarkable  success,  the  campaign  com- 
mittee, shortly  after  the  election,  sent  out  the  following  circu- 
lar to  citizens  in  all  parts  of  the  city: 

DEAR  SIR,  —  The  experience  of  recent  years  has  fully  manifested 
the  unfitness  of  a  miscellaneous  citizens'  caucus  to  judiciously  select  can- 
didates for  our  municipal  offices.  In  the  ordinary  caucus,  composed 

take  steps  during  the  coming  year  to  form  a  permanent  citizens'  committee  of  from 
fifty  to  one  hundred  residents  and  tax-payers  of  this  city  to  be  chosen  with  reference 
to  equal  representation  of  political  parties  and  to  act  from  year  to  year  in  the  in- 
terest of  non-partisan  good  government."  The  committee  was  appointed  and  held 
several  meetings,  but  no  one  being  found  who  was  willing  to  devote  the  time  neces- 
sary to  perfect  the  organization,  the  matter  fell  through. 

90  The  invitation  read  as  follows :  "  You  are  respectfully  invited  to  attend  a 
conference  of  citizens  of  Cambridge  who  are  dissatisfied  with  some  of  the  nomina- 
tions made  at  the  Temple  Hall  Convention."  In  the  case  of  candidates  for  the 
Common  Council  a  number  of  new  men  were  nominated  by  these  private  ward 
caucuses. 


SECT.  5.]         THE  LIBRARY  HALL  ASSOCIATION.  209 

as  it  has  been  of  men  with  widely  divergent  views,  those  persons  having 
no  personal  or  selfish  object  to  secure  have  often  been  at  the  mercy  of 
a  small  but  well  organized  body  of  men  intent  upon  securing  the  nomi- 
nation of  their  friends  regardless  of  their  qualifications.  Under  the 
most  favorable  conditions,  such  meetings  have  not  infrequently  resulted 
in  some  compromise  by  which  unfit  men  have  been  placed  upon  the 
same  ticket  with  good  men.  It  is  proposed  to  form  an  association  of 
voters  without  regard  to  political  preferences,  religious  opinions  or 
nationality,  who  shall  every  year  select  proper  candidates,  whether 
members  of  the  Association  or  not,  and  submit  them  to  the  people  for 
their  approval.  The  experience  of  the  present  year  has  fully  shown  that 
such  a  course  of  action  will  result  in  securing  better  candidates  than  was 
possible  under  the  old  system.  As,  under  the  present  ballot  law, 2l  all 
candidates  can  stand  upon  an  equality  before  the  people,  such  an  asso- 
ciation can  be  successful  only  by  putting  forward  candidates  of  superior 
qualifications. 

In  pursuance  of  the  instructions  of  the  conference  held  in  Library 
Hall,  previous  to  the  last  municipal  election,  the  undersigned  hereby 
invite  you  to  attend  a  meeting  at  Library  Hall,  Main  Street,  corner 
Temple,  Cambridgeport,  Wednesday,  December  18,  at  8  P.M.,  to  con- 
sider the  advisability  of  forming  such  an  association. 

A  printed  copy  of  the  By- Laws  prepared  by  the  Executive  Com- 
mittee of  the  Library  Hall  conference,  will  be  presented  for  con- 
sideration, and  if  the  meeting  so  determines,  the  organization  will  be 
completed  by  the  election  of  officers. 

If  you  are  unable  to  attend,  but  are  in  sympathy  with  the  object 
of  the  proposed  organization,  please  so  inform  the  secretary. 

The  by-laws  adopted  at  the  ensuing  meeting  are,  with  one 
or  two  trifling  amendments,  still  in  force  at  the  present  time; 
the  object  of  the  association  is  stated  to  be  fourfold:  first,  "to 
secure  the  nomination  and  election  of  proper  candidates  for 
municipal  offices;"  secondly,  "to  procure  the  punishment  of 
all  persons  who  may  be  guilty  of  election  frauds,  maladminis- 
tration of  office,  or  misappropriation  of  public  funds;  "  third, 
"to  advocate  and  promote  a  public  service  based  upon  char- 
acter and  ability  only;  "  and  fourth,  "to  promote  intelligent 
discussion  of  municipal  affairs  by  the  publication  and  distri- 

21  I.  e.,  the  Australian  Ballot  Act. 


2io   SUPERVISION  BY  CITIZENS'  ASSOCIATIONS.  [CHAP.  X. 

but  ion  of  reliable  information  in  relation  thereto."28  Any 
citizen  of  Cambridge  is  eligible  to  membership  in  the  asso- 
ciation. Candidates  for  membership  may  be  proposed  at  any 
time,  and,  if  approved  by  three-fourths  of  the  executive  com- 
mittee, can  qualify,  as  members,  by  signing  the  by-laws  and 
paying  the  admission  fee  of  one  dollar.  The  present  member- 
ship of  the  association  is  442. 

It  is  also  provided  that  the  executive  committee  "shall 
investigate  charges  of  misconduct  against  any  member  of  the 
Association,  and  report  to  the  Association  such  recommenda- 
tions as  they  may  deem  desirable  in  relation  to  the  same."23 
Such  member  may  be  expelled  by  a  three-fourth's  vote  of  the 
members  of  the  association,  present  at  any  meeting,  an  oppor- 
tunity being  given  him  to  be  heard  in  his  own  behalf.  The 
by-laws  also  provide  that  "no  person  holding  any  salaried 
position  under  the  national,  state,  or  city  government,  and 
no  member  of  either  branch  of  the  city  Council  shall  be 
eligible  for  election  to  any  office  of  the  association."2* 
Meetings  of  the  association  must  be  held  on  the  last  Monday 
in  October,  December,  and  March,  and  special  meetings  may 
be  called  by  order  of  the  executive  committee,  or  upon  the 
written  request  of  ten  members.  The  secretary  is  required  to 
mail  to  each  member  a  printed  notice  of  the  time  and  place  of 
every  meeting.25 

Coming  now  to  the  practical  working  of  the  association,  the 
first  thing  to  be  noted  is  its  democratic  character  as  compared 
with  the  Philadelphia  Committee  of  One  Hundred.  In  Phila- 
delphia it  will  be  remembered  the  preliminary  meeting  of 
business  men  vested  the  sole  power  of  making  nominations 
in  the  hands  of  the  Committee  of  One  Hundred,  —  a  self- 
perpetuating  body,  composed  exclusively  of  Republicans, 
membership  in  which  was  limited  and  exceedingly  difficult  of 
attainment.  On  the  other  hand,  in  Cambridge,  any  citizen 

»  By-Laws,  Art.  II.  »  By-Laws,  Art.  III. 

84  Itid.,  Art.  IV.  The  officers  of  the  association  consist  of  a  president,  five 
vice-presidents,  one  from  each  ward,  a  secretary,  a  treasurer,  three  auditors,  and  an 
executive  committee  composed  of  five  members  from  each  ward. 

»  By-Laws,  Art  VI. 


SECT.  5.]         THE  LIBRARY  HALL  ASSOCIATION.  2ll 

who  is  known  to  believe  in  conducting  the  affairs  of  the  city 
on  business  principles  is  reasonably  sure  if  he  so  desires,  to 
be  elected  a  member  of  the  Library  Hall  Association.26  The 
most  striking  thing  about  the  whole  system  is  that,  although 
the  executive  committee  has  more  or  less  power  in  the  way 
of  organization  and  campaign  work,  the  power  of  making 
nominations  is  not  assumed  by  the  association,  except  in  rare 
instances;  it  only  selects  from  the  tickets  already  nominated. 
About  four  days  before  the  last  day  for  filing  nomination 
papers  for  the  city  election,  a  special  meeting  of  the  Associa- 
tion is  called  for  the  purpose  of  considering  the  merits  of  the 
candidates  nominated  by  the  different  caucuses  and  conven- 
tions.27 An  admission  ticket  is  sent  to  each  member  of  the 
association  and  to  each  newspaper  reporter;  and  no  one  with- 
out a  ticket  is  admitted  to  the  hall  where  the  meeting  is  to  be 
held.  For  the  convenience  of  the  members,  the  Secretary  of 
the  Association,  before  the  meeting,  prepares  ballots  contain- 
ing the  names  of  each  candidate  known  to  have  been  nomi- 
nated, his  residence,  occupation,  and  the  party  or  persons  by 
whom  he  has  been  nominated.  The  names  of  the  candidates 
for  mayor  and  aldermen  are  read  by  the  President,  and  their 
qualifications  are  discussed  by  the  members,  after  which  a 
ballot  is  taken,  each  member  marking  a  cross  against  the  name 
of  the  persons  for  whom  he  desires  to  vote.  The  candidates 
receiving  the  highest  number  of  votes  are  declared  to  be 
indorsed  by  the  Association,  and  nomination  papers  stating 
that  fact  are  signed  by  the  required  number  of  voters,  and  filed 
with  the  city  clerk. 

Previous  to  the  consideration  of  candidates  for  mayor  and 
aldermen,  the  members  of  the  Association  from  each  ward  get 
together  and,  after  a  discussion,  ballot  for  candidates  for  the 
Common  Council  from  their  ward.  The  candidates  receiving 
the  highest  number  of  votes  are  then  recommended  to  the 

38  I.  e.,  unless  the  number  of  members  at  any  time  gets  to  be  so  large  that  any 
further  increase  would  be  detrimental  to  the  effective  carrying  out  of  the  work 
of  the  Association. 

37  Documents  illustrating  the  practical  working  of  the  Association  will  be  found 
in  Appendix  H. 


212    SUPERVISION  BY  CITIZENS'  ASSOCIATIONS.  [CHAP.  X. 

whole  Association  for  indorsement,  and  are  usually  indorsed  as 
a  matter  of  course.  Inasmuch  as  the  Library  Hall  Associ- 
ation, as  a  rule,  simply  indorses  candidates  already  nominated, 
the  principal  part  of  the  campaign  work  is  left  to  the  party 
making  the  nominations.  A  campaign  paper,  however,  is 
issued  every  year,  containing  a  brief  biography  of  every  candi- 
date receiving  the  Library  Hall  indorsement,  a  copy  of  which 
is  mailed  to  every  voter  in  the  city.  In  addition,  until  re- 
cently, cards  containing  the  names  of  the  Library  Hall  can- 
didates were  distributed  at  every  polling  place  on  election 
day.  Finally,  for  the  last  two  years,  the  Association  has 
caused  to  be  compiled  and  published  in  the  local  newspapers 
a  record  of  each  individual  member  of  the  City  Council,  giving 
his  attendance  at  committee  meetings  as  well  as  at  meetings 
of  the  Board  of  Aldermen  or  Common  Council,  as  the  case 
may  be,  together  with  the  record  of  his  votes  upon  all  matters 
on  which  there  was  a  division.  This  unique  departure  ought 
certainly  to  prove  a  most  potent  factor  in  insuring  the  con- 
tinuance of  good  municipal  government. 

On  the  whole,  the  efforts  of  the  Association  have  met  with 
a  remarkable  degree  of  success.  In  1890  the  Association,  at 
the  last  moment,  put  into  the  field  a  candidate  of  its  own  for 
mayor,  but,  owing  perhaps  to  the  shortness  of  the  time,  he 
was  defeated.  The  next  year  there  was  no  contest  for  the 
mayoralty;  in  1892,  1893,  1894,  and  1895,  the  candidate  in- 
dorsed by  Library  Hall  was  elected.  In  regard  to  aldermen, 
in  1890,  7  out  of  the  10  candidates  indorsed  by  the  Association 
were  elected;  in  1891,  7  out  of  8  were  elected;  in  1892  and 
1893,  9  out  of  n;  and  in  1894  and  1895  the  entire  eleven 
indorsed  were  successful  at  the  polls.  In  regard  to  the  Com- 
mon Council,  the  record  is  still  more  remarkable.  In  1890, 
1891,  1893,  and  1894,  18,  in  1892,  17,  and  in  1895,  19  out  of 
the  20  candidates  receiving  the  Library  Hall  indorsement 
were  elected.28 

"  I  am  indebted  for  these  figures,  as  well  as  for  data  concerning  the  history  of 
the  Association,  to  Mr.  George  G.  Wright,  who  has  served  as  its  secretary  from 
its  organization,  and  to  whose  devoted  and  untiring  work  the  success  of  the  Asso- 
ciation has  been  very  largely  due. 


SECT.  5.]         THE  LIBRARY  HALL  ASSOCIATION.  213 

The  danger  of  such  an  organization  as  the  Library  Hall 
Association  is  that  unscrupulous  men  may  obtain  control  of  it 
and  use  it  for  the  advancement  of  their  own  selfish  ends,  as 
has  been  the  case  with  the  regular  party  organizations  in  New 
York  city.  This  evil  is  to  some  extent  guarded  against  by 
the  general  understanding  that  the  members  are  not  bound  by 
the  action  of  the  association  if  opposed  to  their  conscience 
or  judgment.29  Moreover,  the  broadness  and  impartiality  of 
the  Association  is  another  safeguard  against  management  for 
selfish  ends.  This  was  remarkably  displayed  in  1892,  when  a 
candidate  for  mayor,  who  was  not  a  member  of  the  Associa- 
tion, received  its  indorsement  as  against  a  candidate  who,  at 
the  time,  was  a  member  of  the  executive  committee.  Again, 
the  danger  that  on  account  of  the  temptation  afforded  by  its 
great  weight  the  indorsement  of  the  association  may  be 
obtained  for  certain  candidates  by  unfair  means,  is  guarded 
against  by  the  fact  that  newspaper  reporters  are  always  present 
at  the  nomination  meeting,  and  accounts  of  the  proceedings  are 
published  in  the  Boston  and  Cambridge  papers.  Finally,  the 
evil  of  log-rolling,  previous  to  the  meeting,  is  largely  avoided 
by  the  fact  that  no  one  except  the  secretary  and  treasurer  has 
access  to  the  list  of  members  of  the  Association. 

It  is  for  these  reasons,  and  because  of  its  democratic  charac- 
ter, that  the  Library  Hall  Association  has  been  so  successful 
in  its  work.  Although  it  does  not,  as  a  rule,  nominate  candi- 
dates of  its  own,  nevertheless  the  desire  to  obtain  its  indorse- 
ment stimulates  the  different  local  parties  to  nominate  their 
best  men.  In  some  quarters  it  is  still  denounced  as  an 
aristocratic  club  of  wealthy  men  who  presume  to  dictate  nomi- 
nations to  their  fellow-citizens ;  but  such  a  charge  is  not  borne 
out  by  the  facts.  A  large  and  constantly-increasing  number 
of  the  tax-paying  voters  of  the  city  usually  vote  for  the  Library 
Hall  candidates.  Although  most  of  them  are  not  themselves 

29  Therefore  the  obtaining  by  a  candidate  of  a  bare  majority  at  a  meeting  of  the 
members  affords  no  certainty  that  he  will  secure  the  votes  of  all  the  members  at  the 
polls.  For  instance,  in  1892  the  friends  of  a  certain  candidate  for  mayor  who  failed 
to  get  the  indorsement  of  Library  Hall,  although  they  were  members  of  the  Asso- 
ciation, nevertheless  nominated  him  independently,  and  worked  for  him  at  the  polls 
against  the  candidate  who  had  received  the  indorsement  of  the  Association. 


214    SUPERVISION  BY  CITIZENS'  ASSOCIATIONS.  [CHAP.X. 

members  of  the  Association,  they  have  implicit  confidence  in 
those  who,  as  members,  are  willing  to  give  their  time  and 
money  to  the  cause  of  good  government. 

6.  Other  Citizens'  Associations.  At  the  present  time  (1896) 
there  are  forty-five  municipal  reform  organizations  of  a  local 
character  in  the  United  States  known  to  the  writer.  Many  of 
these,  however,  take  no  part  in  the  nomination  of  candidates, 
such  action  being  expressly  forbidden  in  many  of  the  consti- 
tutions. Their  activity  is  devoted  chiefly  to  watching  the 
administration  of  the  city  government  in  the  interest  of  the 
tax-payers,  and  to  prosecuting  dishonest  and  corrupt  officials. 
Several  of  them,  however,  resemble  the  Cambridge  Library 
Hall  Association  in  indorsing,  occasionally  at  least,  candi- 
dates for  office.80 

One  of  the  most  recent  associations  organized  for  the  pur- 
pose of  securing  better  nominations  for  municipal  office  is  the 
Municipal  League  of  Boston.  The  movement  which  led  to 
the  formation  of  this  organization  sprang  from  the  Pilgrim 
Association,  — a  religious  society  composed  of  members  of  the 
Congregational  Church.  Eleven  other  religious,  philanthropic, 
and  civic  organizations  (including  such  organizations  as  the 
Unitarian  Club,  the  Catholic  Union,  the  Massachusetts  Society 
for  Promoting  Good  Citizenship,  &c. )  agreed  to  send  represen- 
tatives to  the  first  meeting  to  be  held  November  9,  1893, 
and  an  invitation  setting  forth  this  fact  was  sent  to  prominent 
men  in  all  parts  of  the  city.  The  constitution  adopted  at  this 
first  meeting  is  similar,  in  its  main  features,  to  that  of  the 
Cambridge  Library  Hall  Association.  In  addition  to  the 
objects  named  in  the  latter,  the  constitution  of  the  Boston 
Association  names  the  "separation  of  municipal  politics  from 

*°  Such,  for  example,  are  the  Municipal  League  of  Boston,  Massachusetts,  the 
City  Club  and  the  Council  of  Good  Government  Clubs  of  New  York  city ;  the 
Good  Government  Club  of  Yonkers,  New  York ;  the  City  Club  of  New  Brunswick, 
New  Jersey,  the  Citizens'  League  of  Camden,  New  Jersey,  the  "Civic  Federa- 
tions "  of  Detroit  and  Chicago ;  and  the  Municipal  League  of  Philadelphia  (organ- 
ized in  1891).  The  Citizens'  League  of  New  Rochelle,  New  York,  and  one  or  two 
other  associations,  nominate  tickets  of  their  own.  For  a  more  complete  account  of 
these  associations  the  reader  is  referred  to  Proceeding i  of  tkt  National  Conference  for 
Good  City  Government  (Philadelphia  1894),  303-40. 


SECT.  7.]    IN  REGARD  TO  CITIZENS'  ASSOCIATIONS.       215 

State  and  National  politics,"  a  difference  made  necessary  by 
the  fact  that  in  Boston  municipal  politics  are  unfortunately 
still  conducted  on  party  lines.  The  membership  is  limited 
to  200;  and  it  is  provided  that  "preference  shall  be  given  to 
members  of  our  existing  religious,  civic,  philanthropic,  busi- 
ness, and  labor  organizations."  It  is  further  provided  that 
"there  shall  be  no  conditions  of  race  or  creed,"  but  all  in 
sympathy  with  the  purposes  of  the  league  shall  be  alike  eligi- 
ble to  membership.  Section  7  of  the  constitution  is  rather 
novel.  It  is  as  follows: 

Inasmuch  as  the  league  can  be  a  power  for  good  only  as  its  acts 
appeal  to  the  good  judgment  of  our  fellow-citizens,  the  league  shall  not 
be  committed  to  any  public  position  without  the  vote  of  three-fourths  of 
the  members  present ;  and  no  action  of  the  league  shall  be  considered 
as  binding  upon  any  individual  member.81 

It  is  evident,  from  what  has  been  given,  that  the  new  Boston 
association  differs,  on  the  one  hand,  from  the  "  Municipal 
League "  of  Philadelphia,  to  which  every  citizen  who  sub- 
scribes to  the  declaration  of  principles  is  admitted,  and  on  the 
other  hand,  from  the  New  York  "City  Club,"  which  has  a 
club-house,  and  is  more  like  a  social  organization.32 

7.  Conclusions  in  Regard  to  Citizens'  Associations.  There  can 
be  no  doubt  but  that  such  associations  as  have  been  described 
act  as  a  valuable  balance-wheel  in  our  municipal  nominations, 
and  aid  to  secure  the  choice  of  good  men.  The  indirect 
effects  of  their  action  are,  perhaps,  even  more  important.  By 
bringing  together  a  body  of  citizens  interested  in  municipal 
affairs,  they  serve  to  concentrate  public  opinion  in  the  most 
effective  form.  Moreover,  by  their  discussions  of  municipal 
problems,  by  their  exposure  and  prosecution  of  all  kinds  of 
fraud  and  corruption  in  the  public  service,  and  by  the  publi- 

81  The  constitution  is  to  be  found  in  the  Boston  Herald  and  Journal  of  Decem- 
ber 15,  1893.    I*  nas  since  been  published  in  pamphlet  form,  for  distribution  among 
the  members. 

82  At  the  last  municipal  election  the  league  took  no  action  whatever  in  regard  to 
the  nomination  or  indorsement  of  candidates,  having  confined  itself,  since  its  organ- 
ization, to  an  effort  to  bring  about  certain  changes  in  the  Boston  city  charter. 


2i6    SUPERVISION  BY  CITIZENS'  ASSOCIATIONS.  [CHAP.  X. 

cation  of  the  records  and  qualifications  of  the  different  candi- 
dates, they  serve  to  educate  the  public  sentiment  of  the  entire 
community.83  Since  the  only  certain  and  ultimate  remedy 
for  existing  evils  is  to  be  found  in  an  increasing  interest  on 
the  part  of  the  average  citizen  in  public  affairs,  and  in  com- 
pelling party  leaders  to  pursue  open  methods,  such  associa- 
tions are  perhaps  the  most  effectual  means  of  securing  proper 
nominations.  Two  national  conferences  have  been  held,  in 
1894  and  1895,  of  delegates  from  the  different  municipal  reform 
associations  of  the  country,  at  which  the  delegates  discussed 
different  methods  of  work,  and  at  which  papers  were  read  on 
subjects  of  common  interest.  Such  conferences  evidence  a  gen- 
eral awakening  of  our  citizens  to  the  need  of  reform,  particu- 
larly in  our  municipal  governments,  which  is  a  propitious  sign 
for  the  future  of  republican  government. 

8.  The  Question  of  Nominations  Summarized.  It  is  plainly 
evident,  as  shown  both  historically  and  by  present  practice, 
that  some  system  of  nomination  of  candidates  previous  to  elec- 
tion is  necessary.  We  have  seen  that  the  present  system, 
with  its  two  component  parts,  the  primary  and  the  convention, 
has  had  a  most  natural  genesis  and  development,  —  the  primary 
being  simply  the  town-meeting,  and  the  convention  the  legis- 
lative assembly  applied  to  party  nominations.  At  any  rate, 
no  acceptable  substitutes  have  hitherto  been  proposed ;  all 
practicable  suggestions  have  related  to  changes  in  the  details. 
Moreover,  as  we  have  seen,  the  most  successful  municipal 
reform  movements  have  been  based  on  the  indorsement  of 
candidates  nominated  in  the  usual  way,  by  regularly  organized 
parties. 

In  short,  the  present  system  of  nomination  has  come  to  be 
as  firmly  intrenched  in  the  minds  and  habits  of  the  American 
people  as  representative  government  itself.  It  is  a  system 
which  contains  within  itself  a  sufficient  check  on  party  leaders, 
if  the  voters  will  only  avail  themselves  of  it;  it  has,  on  the 

**  Most  of  these  associations,  in  addition  to  their  political  work  in  regard  to 
nominations,  have  numerous  and  varied  fields  of  activity.  For  instance,  the  Civic 
Federation  of  Detroit  has  departments  of  Education,  Philanthropy,  Morals,  Indus- 
trial Work,  Temperance,  Social  Evils,  Legislation,  Conferences,  and  Tenements. 


SECT.  8.]    QUESTION  OF  NOMINA  TIONS  SUMMARIZED.    2 1 7 

whole,  worked  well  in  the  past ;  it  is  in  many  places  working 
well  to-day;  and  it  can  be  made  to  work  well  everywhere. 
The  existing  evils,  particularly  in  the  cities,  which  have  been 
described  somewhat  at  length,  are  not  inherent  in  the  present 
system,  but,  on  the  contrary,  are  the  results  of  a  direct  viola- 
tion of  its  fundamental  principles.  To  say  that  the  political 
condition  in  New  York  city  under  the  Tammany  oligarchy, 
or  under  the  Republican  machine,  is  due  to  the  caucus  and 
convention  system  of  nomination,  is  equivalent  to  saying  that 
the  Central  American  dictatorships  are  the  natural  results  of 
the  principles  of  republican  government.  Both  are  due  to  the 
prostitution  of  correct  principles  to  selfish  ends,  and  should 
be  treated  accordingly. 

Looking  at  the  matter  calmly,  in  the  light  of  history,  there 
is  no  occasion  for  despair,  no  room  for  political  pessimism. 
As  in  every  other  walk  of  life,  there  is  work  to  be  done,  and 
plenty  of  it.  Three  reforms  are  urgently  needed :  a  diminution 
in  the  number  of  elective  offices;  the  absolute  separation  of 
national  and  State  politics  from  local  affairs;  and,  above  all, 
the  eradication  of  the  spoils  system  in  the  public  service,  and 
the  consequent  destruction  of  the  class  of  professional  politi- 
cians. These  reforms,  combined  with  the  establishment  of 
wise  party  rules  and  honestly  enforced  statute  laws,  will  do 
much  to  make  our  present  system  of  nomination  work  sat- 
isfactorily where  now  it  seems  to  fail.  In  order,  however, 
to  attain  any  lasting  success,  there  must  be,  in  addition,  a 
thorough  arousing  of  public  interest  by  education  and  by  intel- 
ligent organization.  Thus  only  will  bad  nominations,  and  the 
tacit  consent  of  the  voters  to  the  selection  of  unworthy  candi- 
dates, be  finally  and  permanently  removed. 


APPENDICES. 


APPENDIX   A. 


BIBLIOGRAPHY. 

ALLEN,  W.  F.  The  Caucus  System  in  the  United  States.  Christian 
Examiner,  LXXXVII.  137  .  (Sept.  1869.) 

BERNHEIM,  A.  C.  Party  Organizations  and  their  Nominations  to 
Public  Office  in  New  York  City.  Political  Science  Quarterly,  III. 
99-123.  (March,  1888.) 

BRYCE,  JAMES.  The  American  Commonwealth.  N.  Y.  Macmillan, 
(1895),  3d  ed.,  Part  III.  (The  Party  System.)  Chaps.  LVIL- 
LXXIII.  inclusive.  II,  55-227. 

CAUCUS,  The  Trouble  with  the.  New  Englander,  XXXIV.  473. 
(July,  1875.) 

CONE,  S.  W.   Dangers  of  Conventions.   Democratic  Review,  XXXVI. 

453- 

DALLINGER,  F.  W.  A  Word  about  the  Caucus.  New  England  Mag- 
azine, VIII.  754.  (Aug.,  1893.) 

DANA,  R.  H.  Substitutes  for  the  Caucus.  Forum,  II.  491.  (Jan. 
1887.) 

DE  VARIGNY,  C.  La  Convention  D£mocratique  a  Chicago.  Revue 
des  Deux  Mondes  (Juil.-Aout,  1892),  682.  (Aug.  i,  1892.) 

EATON,  DORMAN  B.  ("Junius.")  The  Independent  Movement  in 
New  York.  Questions  of  the  Day.  (N.  Y.,  Putnam,  1880.) 

FIELD,  D.  D.  The  Primary,  the  Pivot  of  Reform.  Forum,  XIV. 
189.  (Oct.,  1892.) 

FIELD,  D.  D.  Our  Political  Methods.  Forum,  II.  213.  (Nov., 
1886.) 

GODKIN,  E.  L.  The  Caucus  and  the  Republican  Party.  Nation, 
VII.  4.  (July  2,  1868.) 


222  APPENDICES. 

GODKIN,  E.  L.  Nominating  Conventions.  Nation,  XXII.  240. 
(April  13,  1876.) 

GODKIN,  E.  L.  Criminal  Politics.  North  American  Review,  CL. 
706.  (June,  1890.) 

GREEN,  G.  W.  Our  Nominating  Machines.  Atlantic  Monthly,  LII. 
323.  (Sept.,  1883.) 

GREEN,  G.  VV.  Facts  about  the  Caucus  and  the  Primary.  North 
American  Review,  CXXXVII.  257-270.  (Sept.,  1883.) 

HALSTEAD,  MURAT.  Our  National  Political  Conventions.  Cosmo- 
politan, XIII.  194.  (June,  1892.) 

HALSTEAD,  MURAT.  The  Convention  at  Minneapolis.  Cosmopolitan, 
XIII.  507.  (Aug.,  1892.) 

HALSTEAD,  MURAT.  The  Chicago  Convention.  Cosmopolitan,  XIII. 
585.  (Sept.,  1892.) 

HOFFMAN,  E.  F.  Primary  Elections ;  Reform  in  the  Delegate  Sys- 
tem of  Nominations.  Penn  Monthly,  XII.  602.  (Aug.,  1881.) 

LAWTON,  G.  W.  The  American  Caucus  System,  its  Origin,  Purpose 
and  Utility.  Questions  of  the  Day.  (N.  Y.,  Putnam,  1885.) 

MCMILLAN,  D.  C.  The  Elective  Franchise  in  the  United  States. 
(N.  Y.,  Putnam,  1880.) 

MEANS,  D.  M.  The  Trouble  with  the  Caucus.  New  Englander, 
XXXIV.  473.  (July,  1875.) 

MERWIN,  HENRY  CHILDS.  Tammany  Hall.  Atlantic  Monthly, 
LXXIII.  240.  (Feb.,  1894.) 

MORGAN,  J.  T.  Party  Conventions.  North  American  Review,  CLV. 
237.  (Aug.,  1892.) 

MUNICIPAL  POLITICS.  The  Old  and  the  New.  Municipal  League  of 
Philadelphia  Clubs.  (1894.) 

MURDOCK,  J.  S.  The  First  National  Nominating  Convention. 
American  Historical  Review,  I.  680. 

NYE,  A.  B.  The  Primary  in  California.  Nation,  XXXIV.  74.  (Jan. 
26,  1882.) 

PUBLIC  OPINION  AND  CONVENTIONS.  Nation,  LIV.  460.  (June  23, 
1892.) 

REMSEN,  D.  S.  Primary  Elections,  a  Study  of  Methods  for  improving 
the  Basis  of  Party  Organization.  Questions  of  the  Day.  (N.  Y.,  Put- 
nam, 1894.) 

REMSEN,  D.  S.     Suffrage  and  the  Ballot.    N.  Y.,  Appleton.  (1892.) 

ROOSEVELT,  THEODORE.  Essays  on  Practical  Politics.  (Essay  No.  2.) 
Questions  of  the  Day.  (N.  Y.,  Putnam,  1888.) 


APPENDIX  A. 


223 


SEDGWICK,  A.  G.  Legalization  of  Caucuses.  Nation,  VIII.  86. 
(Feb.  4,  1869.) 

"  SHALL  MACHINE  POLITICS  RULE?  "    "  Californian."    (Oct.,  1892.) 

STICKNEY,  ALBERT.  Democratic  Government;  a  Study  in  Politics. 
(N.  Y.,  Harpers,  1885.) 

STICKNEY,  ALBERT.  A  True  Republic,  Chapters  V.  VI.  and  VII. 
(N.  Y.,  Harpers,  1879.) 

STORY,  MOORFIELD.  Politics  as  a  Duty  and  as  a  Career.  Ques- 
tions of  the  Day.  (N.  Y.,  Putnam,  1889.) 

SULZBERGER,  M.  Nominations  for  Public  Offices.  Penn  Monthly, 
XII.  177.  (March,  1881.) 

TERRY,  H.  T.  A  Substitute  for  the  Caucus.  New  Englander,  XXXIV. 
734.  (October,  1875.)  Reprinted  in  Cambridge  Civil  Service  Reform 
Association's  Prize  Essays  (1884),  58-70. 

THAYER,  ADIN.  Speech  on  the  Caucus  and  Republican  Institutions. 
Boston  Herald,  Oct.  9,  1881. 

THE  MACHINE  versus  THE  PEOPLE.  Century,  XLIV.  154.  (May, 
1892.) 

THE  MACHINE  versus  THE  POPULAR  WILL.  Nation,  LIV.  390.  (May 
26,  1892.) 

THE  REGENERATION  OF  THE  PRIMARY.  Nation,  XXXIII.  486.  (Dec. 
22,  1881.) 

TYNG,  T.  MITCHELL.  Tammany  from  Within.  Tammany  Hall  Sou- 
venir (N.  Y.,  1893),  104-110  inclusive. 

WHITRIDGE,  F.  W.  The  Caucus  System.  New  York  Society  for 
Political  Education,  1883.  (Economic  Tract  No.  8.) 

WINGATE,  CHARLES  F.  An  Episode  in  Municipal  Government. 
(History  of  the  Tweed  Ring  in  New  York.)  North  American  Review, 
CXIX.  359  (Oct.,  1874);  CXX.  119  (Jan.,  1875);  CXXI.  113 
(July,  1875)  ;  CXXIII.  362  (Oct.,  1876.) 


The  following  articles  have  appeared  relative  to  the  recent  introduc- 
tion of  the  American  Caucus  System  into  England  :  — 

CAUCUS,  A  Defence  of  the.  Saturday  Review,  LIV.  7.  (July  i, 
1882.) 

CAUCUS  AND  CAUCUS.  Saturday  Review,  LIX.  810.  (June  20, 
1885.) 


224  APPENDICES. 

CHAMBERLAIN,  JOSEPH.  The  Caucus.  Fortnightly  Review,  XXX.  721. 
(Nov.,  1878.) 

ELECTIONEERING  METHODS  IN  ENGLAND.  North  American  Review, 
CLV.  338.  (Sept.,  1892.) 

GODKIN,  E.  L.  The  Caucus  in  England.  Nation,  XXVII.  141. 
(Sept.  5,  1878.) 

GOVERNMENT  BY  CAUCUS.  Saturday  Review,  LIII.  653.  (May  27, 
1882.) 

MACDONNELL,  J.  Is  the  Caucus  a  Necessity?  Fortnightly  Review 
(Old  series),  XLIV.  780.  (Dec.,  1885.) 

SCHNADHORST,  F.  The  Caucus  and  its  Critics.  Nineteenth  Century, 
XII.  8.  (July,  1882.) 

THE  CAUCUS.     Saturday  Review,  LXI.  210.     (Feb.  13,  1886.) 

TROLLOPE,  T.  A.  Caucus  and  Camorra.  National  Review,  IV.  842. 
(Feb.,  1885.) 

WILSON,  E.  D.  J.  The  Caucus  and  its  Consequences.  Nineteenth 
Century,  IV.  695.  (Oct.,  1878.) 

NOTE.  —  For  books  and  articles  on  the  subject  of  municipal  government 
dealing  indirectly  with  the  question  of  nominations,  the  reader  is  referred  to 
the  admirable  bibliography  contained  in  the  "  Proceedings  of  the  National 
Conference  for  Good  City  Government,  held  at  Philadelphia,  Jan.  25th  and 
26th,  1894,  341  to  381  inclusive.  (Philadelphia  Municipal  League,  1894.) 
An  excellent  bibliography  of  the  published  proceedings  of  early  nominating 
conventions  will  be  found  in  the  American  Historical  Review,  I.  760-71. 


APPENDIX  B. 

APPENDIX   B. 

FORMS  USED   IN  CAUCUSES. 


225 


I. 

Facsimile  of  call  for  the  Republican  Caucuses  held  in  Cambridge, 
Mass.,  Sept.  17,  1896.  This  call  was  posted  in  conspicuous  places 
in  different  parts  of  the  city.  A  copy  of  the  call  was  also  published 
in  the  local  newspapers. 

REPUBLICAN 

CAUCUSES. 

The  enrolled  Republicans,  and  other  qualified  voters  of  Cambridge,  who  intend  to  enroll  as  Republican*  at  (he  within 
named  caucuses,  in  accordance  with  the  rules  adopted  by  the  Republican  City  Committee,  are  requested  to  meet  on 

KPT.  17, 


AT   7.30   O'CLOCK,   AS   FOLLOWS: 


Such  TOten  of  Ward!  1  and  3  Will  meet  in  their  respective  Ward  Rooms;  those  of  Ward  2  in  Temple  Hall; 
those  of  Ward  4  in  Citizens  Trade  Association  Hall,  634  Massachusetts  Avenuo;  those  of  Ward  B  in  Odd  Fellows 
Hall,  to  choose  Delegates  to  the  State,  Congressional,  Councillor,  County  and  Senatorial  Conventions,  and  to 
elect  from  each  Ward,  seven  members  to  serve  upon  the  Ward  and  City  Committee  for  the  year  189y 

Ward  I  is  entitled  to  8  Delegate*. 
Ward  2  is  entitled  to  II  Delegate*. 
Ward  3  is  entitled  to  4  Delegates. 
Ward  4J*  entitled  to  II  Delegate*. 
Ward  5  is  entitled  to  6  Delegate*. 

To  each  of  the  above  named  Convention*. 

Also  to  nominate  in  Wards  I.  2,  3,  4  and  0,  Candidates  for  Representatives  to  the  General  Court. 

Ward  1  is  entitled  to  1  Candidate. 
Ward  2  it  entitled  to  2  Candidate*. 
Ward  3  is  entitled  to  I  Candidate. 
Ward  4  is  entitled  to  2  Candidate*. 
Ward  S  i*  entitled  to  I  Candidate. 
Also  fa  the  transaction  of  any  other  badness  that  may  properly  come  before  said  Canonic*. 

These  Caucuses  an  to  be  heU  in  accordance  with  the  provisions  of  the  Election  Act  of  18»B,  and  will  be  railed 
•o  order  by  the  Chairman  of  the  Ward  Committee,  or  In  his  absence  by  some  other  member  of  said  Committee. 

For  Rules  of  the  City  Commute*  adopted  for  the  conduct  of  the  said  Caucuses  ste  the  local  Newspaper*  Of 
•Vstt  of  September  l£.  law 

CHARLES  W.  CHENEY.  President. 
THORSDIKE  SPALD1NG.  Secretary. 

Cambridge  Repybfloan  City  Committee. 

_^ Headquarter*,  Pronpeet  Home,  628  Mattachutett*  Avenue. 

Cambridge  Press  Job  Print 
T5 


226  APPENDICES. 

II. 

Ticket  used  at  the  Republican  Caucus  held  in  Ward  5,  Cambridge, 
Sept.  17,  1896.  This  ticket  was  made  up  at  a  meeting  of  some  of 
the  representative  men  of  the  ward. 

Ward  5  Republican  Caucus. 

SEPTEMBER   17,    1896. 

TEAR    OFF   THE   SLIPS   AND   DEPOSIT   THEM    SEPARATELY   IN    THE   BOXES 
PROVIDED   THEREFOR. 

State  Delegates. 

Ihn-itl    T.    Dickin.ton  John   E.   Parry 

George   A.  Allison  John   J.   Henderson 

Randolph    C.  Surbridge  Frank   E.  Sands 

Congressional  Delegates. 

Otis   S.  Brown  Silas   E.  Buck 

Walter    II     I. e  rued  Andrew   J.   Lorell 

1'    J.  McElroy  James   A.    Wood 

County  Delegates. 

Frank   E.  Sands  Herbert   W.  Hayes 

Fred   D.  Norton  C.  Burnside   Seagrave 

Albert   S.  Apsey  Charles   H.  Fosgate 

Councilor  Delegates. 

Frank   Foxcroft  Adoniram   J.   lAttlefleld 

Randolph    C.  Surbridge  Parker   F.   Soule 

Otis   S.  Brown  Albert   S.  Apsey 

Senatorial  Delegates. 

Arthur   E.  Denison  Frederick    Worcester 

Leroy  S.  Brown  William   F.  Stark 

Charles   F.  Stratton  O.  Elliot   Smith 

Ward  and  City  Committee. 

Randolph   C.  Surbridge  Albert   H.  Hall 

Da  rid    T.   B-lckinson  George    V.  S.   Mtchaelis 

Albert   S.  Apsey  Robert   A.  Parry 

Charles  H.   Fosgate 

Representative  Fifth  Middlesex  District. 

David    T.   Dickinson 


APPENDIX  B.  22.7 

III. 

Ticket  for  Delegates  to  the  State  Convention,  used  at  the  Repub- 
lican Caucus  held  in  Ward  4,  Cambridge,  Sept.  17,  1896. 


FOR  DELEGATES  TO 

REPUBLICAN  STATE  CONVENTION 


CHARLES   W.   CHENEY. 

JOHN    D.    BILLINGS. 
BARTHOLOMEW   M.   YOUNG. 

GEO.   S.    EVANS. 
JAMES   W.   COLEMAN. 

ALBERT   L.    NORRIS. 

CHARLES   W.   THIERY. 

WILLIAM   J.    A.    SULLIVAN. 

CHARLES    F.  WYMAN. 

OSCAR  A.    LUNDGREN. 

CHARLES   WAUGH. 


IV. 

Ballot  used  at  the  Republican  Representative  Caucus  held  in  Ward 
2,  Cambridge,  Oct.  10,   1892. 


FOR  REPRESENTATIVES. 


GEORGE    CLOSE, 
DAVID    T.    DICKINSON. 


228  APPENDICES. 

V. 

SENfiTORIflL  CREDENTIAL 


THIRD  MIDDLESEX  DISTRICT. 


This  is  to  certify  that  at  a  Caucus  of  the  Repub- 
lican   voters    of    Ward ,  Cambridge,    held    on 

Evening, 189 ,  Mr. 

was    elected    a 

delegate  to   the   Senatorial   Convention,   to   be   held  in 
Ward  Room,  Central  Square  Building,  Cambridge,  on 

189 ,   at. 

oclock, 

Chairman. 

Secretary. 


I  hereby  appoint 

to  act  in  my  capacity  at  the  above  convention. 


.Delegate. 


NOTE.  —  The  endorsement  by  a  delegate  of  his  credential  to  some  one 
else  is  now  prohibited  by  the  Massachusetts  Caucus  Act  of  1895. 


APPENDIX  B.  229 

VI. 

"Ticket"  distributed  to  the  voters  at  the  town  meeting  held  in 
the  town  of  Leicester,  Mass.,  March  5,  1894.  This  ticket  was  made 
up  at  a  preliminary  meeting  or  "  parlor  caucus." 

CAUCUS  TICKET. 


For  Selectmen. 

WILLIAM  A.  BELL. 
ALBERT  E.  SMITH. 
JOHN  W.  BOARDMAN. 

For  Assessors. 

CHARLES  M.   MARSH. 
GEORGE  E.  STIMPSON. 
JAMES   L.  GALLAGHER. 

For  Overseers  of  Poor. 

JAMES   L.  GALLAGHER. 
DAVID  A.  BOYD. 
A.  B.   KENNEDY. 

For  Auditor. 
PARKMAN  T.  DENNY. 

For  Treasurer. 
J.  CLARENCE  WATSON. 

For  Collector  of  Taxes. 

AMOS  A.  GOULD. 

For  Constables. 

AMOS  A.  GOULD. 
FRANK  SEVEY. 
JOSEPH  GIBBS. 
MATTHEW  TRAINOR. 
HUGH  J.  RICE. 
JOSEPH  CONE. 
A.  B.   KENNEDY. 
L.  B.   DAVIS. 


230 


APPENDICES. 


VII.  Official  Ballot  used  at  the  Republican  Caucus  held  in  Ward  25, 
lian  Ballot  System  to  the  conduct  of  caucuses  under  party  rules.  Ward 
tions  as  delegates  to  the  different  conventions. 


THE   OFFI 

REPUBLICAN    CITY   COM 

To  vote  for  a  periton,  mark  a  crost   M 

If  a  candidate  receives  more  than  one  vote  on  this  ballot, 


For  Delegates  to  the 


For  Delegates  to  the 


STATE    CONVENTION. 
VOIP  for  Nlie 

COUNTY  CONVENTION. 
Tote  for  JUie 

J.  HARRIS  AUBIN     

WILL  s.  FULLER  

CHARLES  H.  DIMOCK  .... 

CHARLES  P.  HARDING     .    .    . 

BENJAMIN  M.  FISKE    .... 

WILLIAM  E.  HIBBARD      .    .    . 

GRANVILLE  A.  FULLER    .    .    . 

HOMER  ROGERS    

JAMES  W.  HARVEY  

JOHN  W.  HARVEY    

IRA  HARRIS  

GEORGE  A.  NUTE      

HENRY  W.  LONGFELLOW    . 

EUGENE  A.  REED,  JR  

CLARENCE  W.   SANDERSON     . 

FRANK  G.  NEWHALL  .... 

HENRY   M.  WILD  

JAMES  W.  SHAPLEIGH    .    .    . 

HOMER  ROGERS     

GEORGE  E.   BROCK   

JAMES  W.  HARVEY      .... 

AMOS  P.  SARGENT   

CLARENCE  W.  SANDERSON     . 

CHARLES  E.  HOLM  AN  .    .    .    . 

LOUIS  MONTO    

ROBERT  HOOKER  

SAMUEL  H.  MITCHELL     .    .    . 
ROBERT  HOOKER 

FREDERICK  EATON  
ATJ8TIV    TUf'Kl  n\V 

HENRY  M.  WILD   

HENRY  M.  WILD  

FRANK  H.  HOWE      

FRANK  H.   HOWE      

FRANK  G.  NEWHALL  .... 

EUGENE  A.   REED,  JR  

THIS    DELEGATION    18    UNPLEDGED 

FREDERICK  HAMMOND    .    .    . 

HOMER  ROGERS 

HENRY  M.  WILD  

GRANVILLE  A    FULLER 

CHARLES  E.   HOLMAN  .     .     .     . 

ROBERT  HOOKER  

JAMES  w.  HARVEY    .... 

WALTER  F    PILLSBURY 

FREDERICK  EATON  

FRANK  G    NEWHALL 

PALMER  L.  GUPTILL    .... 

JAMFS  E    GALLAGHFR 

FREDERICK  HAMMOND 

ISAAC  W.  WARREN  

HKNRY  P.  GOODENOUGH     .     . 
^AM'    W     MANTCINYl 

JOEL  W.  BENT  

D.  OTIS  SANGER  

APPENDIX  B. 


231 


Boston,  Sept.  22,  1893.     This  illustrates  the  application  of  the  Austra- 
25  is  a  Republican  Ward,  and  hence  we  find  many  candidates  for  posi- 


CIAL    BALLOT 

THl 

MITTEE,  OF  BOSTON. 

in  the  square  at  the  right  of  the  name. 

but  one  vote  for  such  candidate  shall  be  counted. 


For  Delegates  to  the 
COUNCILLOR   CONVENTION. 
Tote  for  Nine 

For  Delegates  to  the 
SENATORIAL   CONVENTION. 
Tote  for  Nine 

HOMER  ROGERS    

JAMES  J.  WINGATE  

GRANV1LLE  A.  FULLER    .     .     . 

BENJAMIN   M.  FISKE    .... 

FRANK  G.   NEWHALL   .... 

CHARLES   P.    HARDING     .     .     . 

FREDERICK  HAMMOND     .     .     . 

MARK  A.  WATERHOUSE  .     .     . 

EDWIN  T.   KNOWLTON     .     .     . 

CYRUS  E.   MARSHALL  .... 

SAMUEL  H.  MITCHELL     .     .     . 

GEORGE  B.   LIVERMORE  .     .     . 

FRANK  W.  MOORE   

WILLIAM   SCOLLINS      .... 

CHARLES  H.   DANA  

CHARLES  T.   STETSON.    .     .     • 

JOSIAH  RHODES    

J.   HARRIS   AUBIN      

WILLIAM  E.  HIBBARD      .     .     . 

JAMES  I.  WINGATE  

FRANK  H.   HOWE      

BENJAMIN  M.   FISKE    .     .     .     . 

WILLIAM   M.   FARRINGTON  .     . 

GEORGE  B.   LIVERMORE   .     .     . 

JAMES  W.   SHAPLEIGH     .     .     . 

MARK  A.   WATERHOUSE  .     .     . 

GEORGE  A.    NUTE      

CYRUS   E.   MARSHALL  .... 

D.   OTIS   SANGER  

CHARLES   T.    STETSON      .     .     . 

BENJAMIN   F.    PAINE     .... 

WILLIAM   SCOLLANS     .... 

EUGENE  A.   REED,  JR  

CHARLES  P.  HARDING     .     .     . 

HARVEY  R.   RUGGLES  .... 

J.  HARRIS  AUBIN     

JOSEPH  BENNETT     

JOHN  W.  HARVEY    

AUSTIN   BIGELOW     

CHARLES  H.   DIMOCK  .... 

JAMES  W.  HAKVEY  

FREDERICK  HAMMOND     .     .     . 

GEORGE  B.   LIVERMORE   .     .     . 

CHARLES  T.   STETSON  .... 

FRANK  G.  NEWHALL  .... 

ISAAC  F.  WOODBURY  .... 

GEORGE  A.  NUTE      

JAMES  CHALMERS     

EUGENE  A.   REED,  JR  

WrV\fT?P     T?r*PT?RQ 

JOHN   F.  GOODWIN  
AUGUST  WFITZ 

CLARENCE  W.   SANDERSON      . 

GRANVILLE  A.   FULLER    .     .     . 

AUSTIN  BIGELOW      

JAMES  I.  WINGATE  

WILLIAM  E.   HIBBARD  .... 

BENJAMIN  M.  FISKE    .... 

JOHN  L.   B.  PRATT  

CHARLES  P.   HARDING      .    .    . 

CHARLES  P.   HARDING     .     .     . 

MARK  A.  WATERHOUSE  .    .     . 

J.  HARRIS  AUBIN     

CYRUS  E.  MARSHALL  .... 

LOUIS  MONTO   

GEORGE  B.  LIVERMORE  .     .     . 

JAMES  W.  HARVEY  

WILLIAM  SCOLLANS     .... 

ISAAC  W.  WARREN  

J.  HARRIS  AUBIN     

FRANK  G.  NEWHALL  .... 

CHARLES  T.   STETSON      .    .     . 

232  APPENDICES. 


VII. 

[On  the  reverse."] 


THE  OFFICIAL  BALLOT 


REPUBLICAN  CITY  COMMITTEE, 

OF  BOSTON. 
SEPTEMBER   22,    1893. 


Secretary. 


APPENDIX  B. 
VIII. 


233 


Official  Ballot  used  at  the  Republican  Caucus  held  in  Ward  13, 
Boston,  Sept.  22,  1893.  Ward  13  is  a  solidly  Democratic  ward,  and 
hence  we  find  little  interest  manifested  at  the  Republican  caucuses. 
This  ticket  probably  represents  the  ward  committee's  "  slate." 

"W-AJRJD   13. 

THE  OFFICIAL  BALLOT 

OF   THE 

REPUBLICAN  CITY  COMMITTEE,  OF  BOSTON. 

To  vote  for  a  person,  mark  a  cross  |x|  in  the  square 
at  the  right  of  the  name. 


For  Delegates  to  the 

STATE  CONVENTION, 

Tote  fo 

r  Foui 

For  Delegates  to  the 

COUNTY  CONVENTION. 

Tote  fo 

r  Four 

E.  MERTAIN  HATCH      .     .     . 

FRANK  FAULHEFER      .     .    . 

JOHN  J.   VORTISCH  .... 

HENRY  C.   BAMBERG    .     .     . 

CHARLES  H.   TURNER  .     .     . 

WINFIELD  E.  CLOGSTON.    . 

WALTER  H.  ROCKWELL  .     . 

NELSON   W.   STEELE      .     .     . 

For  Delegates  to  the 

COUNCILLOR  CONVENTION. 

Tote  for  Four 


HARRY  W.   FARMER      .     .    . 

EDWARD   W.   S.   PETERS  .     . 

HENRY  MITCHELL     .... 

FREDERICK  J.  MITCHELL    . 

For  Delegates  to  the 

SENATORIAL  CONVENTION. 


Tote  for  Four 


JOHN  J.  VORTISCH   .... 

HENRY  C.   BAMBERG    .    .    . 

HENRY  E.   STELTZ     .... 

WINFIELD  E.  CLOGSTON  .    . 

APPENDICES. 


APPENDIX  C. 

DOCUMENTS  ILLUSTRATIVE  OF   NATIONAL 
CONVENTIONS. 


i.  OFFICIAL  CALL  OF  THE   DEMOCRATIC   NATIONAL 
CONVENTION   OF   1892. 

THE  National  Democratic  Committee,  at  a  meeting  held  this  day  in 
the  City  of  Washington,  D.  C.,  has  appointed  Tuesday,  the  zist  day  of 
June,  1892,  as  the  time,  and  chosen  the  City  of  Chicago  as  the  place, 
for  holding  the  National  Democratic  Convention.  Each  State  is  entitled 
to  representation  therein  equal  to  double  the  representation  to  which  it 
is  entitled  in  the  next  Electoral  College,  and  each  Territory  and  the 
District  of  Columbia  shall  have  two  delegates.  All  Democratic  con- 
servative citizens  of  the  United  States,  irrespective  of  past  political 
associations  and  differences,  who  can  unite  with  us  in  the  effort  for 
pure,  economical  and  constitutional  government,  are  cordially  invited 
to  join  in  sending  delegates  to  the  Convention. 

CALVIN   S.  BRICE,   Chairman. 
SIMON    P.  SHEERIN,  Sccretaty. 

January  21,  1892. 


2.  OFFICIAL  CALL  OF  THE    REPUBLICAN    NATIONAL 
CONVENTION   OF   1896. 

To  the  Republican  Electors  of  the  United  States. 


IN  accordance  with  usage  and  the  instructions  of  the  Republican 
National  Convention  of  1892,  and  by  direction  of  the  National 
Committee,  a  National  Convention  of  delegated  representatives  of  the 
Republican  party  will  be  held  at  the 

City  of  St.  Louis,  in  the  State  of  Missouri,  on  Tuesday,  the  Sixteenth 
day  of  June,  1896,  at  12  o'clock,  noon, 

for  the  purpose  of  nominating  candidates  for  President  and  Vice-Presi- 
dent  of  the  United  States,  to  be  supported  at  the  next  National  election, 


APPENDIX  C. 


235 


and  for  the  transaction  of  such  other  and  further  business  as  may  be 
brought  before  it.  The  Republican  electors  in  the  several  States  and 
Territories,  and  voters  without  regard  to  past  political  affiliations,  who 
believe  in  Republican  principles  and  endorse  the  Republican  policy, 
are  cordially  invited  to  unite  under  this  call  in  the  formation  of  a 
National  ticket. 

Each  State  will  be  entitled  to  four  delegates  at  large,  and  for  each 
representative  in  Congress  at  large,  two  delegates,  and  each  Congres- 
sional District,  each  Territory  and  the  District  of  Columbia,  to  two 
delegates.  The  delegates  at  large  shall  be  chosen  by  popular  State 
Conventions,  called  on  not  less  than  twenty  days'  published  notice,  and 
not  less  than  thirty  days  before  the  meeting  of  the  National  Convention. 

The  Congressional  District  delegates  shall  be  chosen  at  conventions 
called  by  the  Congressional  Committee  of  each  such  district,  in  the 
same  manner  as  the  nomination  of  a  Representative  in  Congress  is 
made  in  said  district,  provided  that  in  any  Congressional  district  where 
there  is  no  Republican  Congressional  Committee  the  Republican  State 
Committee  shall  appoint  from  the  residents  of  such  district  a  committee 
for  the  purpose  of  calling  a  District  Convention  to  elect  district  dele- 
gates. The  Territorial  delegates  shall  be  chosen  in  the  same  manner 
as  the  nomination  of  a  delegate  in  Congress  is  made. 

The  delegates  from  the  District  of  Columbia  shall  be  chosen  at  a 
convention  to  be  called  by  the  committee  of  three  provided  for  by  the 
National  Committee,  at  its  meeting  in  Washington  City  on  December 
10,  1895,  and  such  convention  shall  be  constituted  of  members  elected 
in  district  primaries  to  be  held  at  such  time  and  places,  and  presided 
over  by  such  judges  of  election  as  said  committee  of  three  may  appoint. 

In  addition  to  the  representation  now  authorized  by  the  rules  of  the 
National  Convention  for  the  Territories  of  Utah,  New  Mexico,  Okla- 
homa and  Arizona,  the  Committee  advises  each  of  said  Territories  to 
elect  four  delegates,  and  the  admission  of  such  additional  delegates  to 
the  convention  is  recommended.  An  alternate  delegate  for  each  dele- 
gate to  the  National  Convention,  to  act  in  case  of  the  absence  of  the 
delegate,  shall  be  elected  in  the  same  manner  and  at  the  same  time  as 
the  delegate  is  elected. 

All  notices  of  contests  must  be  filed  with  the  Secretary  of  the  National 
Committee,  in  writing,  accompanied  by  printed  statements  of  the  grounds 
of  contest,  which  shall  be  made  public.  Preference  in  the  order  of 
hearing  and  determining  contests  will  be  given  by  the  Committee  in 
accordance  with  the  dates  of  filing  such  notices  and  statements  with  the 
Secretary. 

THOMAS   H.    CARTER,    Chairman. 
JOSEPH   H.   MANLEY,  Secretary. 

WASHINGTON,  D.  C.,  December  14,  1895. 


2  36  APPENDICES. 

3.   RULES  ADOPTED   BY  THE   DEMOCRATIC   NATIONAL 
CONVENTION   OF    1892. 

[TAKEN  FROM  THE  "OFFICIAL  PROCEEDINGS,"  29  AND  67.] 

"To  THE  NATIONAL  DEMOCRATIC  CONVENTION:  — 

"  Your  Committee  on  Rules  and  Order  of  Business  beg  leave  to  sub- 
mit the  following  recommendations : 

"  We  recommend  the  following  order  of  business  to  be  preserved  by 
this  Convention : 

"First — Report  of  the  Committee  on  Credentials. 

"  Second —  Report  of  the  Committee  on  Permanent  Organization. 

"  Third — Report  of  the  Committee  on  Resolutions. 

"  Fourth  —  Nomination  of  a  candidate  for  the  office  of  President  of 
the  United  States. 

"Fifth  —  Nomination  of  a  candidate  for  the  office  of  Vice-President 
of  the  United  States. 

"Your  Committee  further  recommends  that  the  rules  of  the  last 
Democratic  Convention  shall  be  adopted  for  the  government  of  this 
Convention. " 

These  rules,  which  are  the  same  as  those  adopted  by  the  Dem- 
ocratic national  convention  held  in  Cincinnati,  June  ist,  1852,  are  as 
follows  : 

"  Resolved,  That  the  rules  of  the  House  of  Representatives,  as  far  as 
applicable  for  the  government  of  the  Convention,  be  adopted  as  the 
rules  of  this  Convention. 

"  Resolved,  That  two-thirds  of  the  whole  number  of  votes  given  shall 
be  necessary  to  a  nomination  of  Candidates  for  President  and  Vice- 
President  of  the  United  States  by  this  Convention. 

"  Resolved,  That  in  voting  upon  any  question  which  may  arise  in  the 
proceedings  of  this  Convention,  the  vote  shall  be  taken  by  States,  at  the 
request  of  any  one  State  —  each  State  to  be  entitled  to  the  number  of 
votes  to  which  such  State  is  entitled  in  the  next  electoral  college,  with- 
out regard  to  the  number  of  delegates  in  attendance  :  the  manner  in 
which  said  vote  is  to  be  cast  to  be  decided  by  the  delegation  of  each 
State  by  itself." 


4.   RULES  ADOPTED  BY  THE   REPUBLICAN  NATIONAL 
CONVENTION  OF   1896. 

RULE  i .  The  Convention  shall  consist  of  a  number  of  delegates  from 
each  State  equal  to  double  the  number  of  its  Senators  and  Representa- 
tives in  Congress,  six  delegates  each  from  the  Territories  of  Arizona, 
Indian  Territory,  New  Mexico  and  Oklahoma,  four  from  Alaska,  and 
two  from  the  District  of  Columbia. 


APPENDIX  C. 


237 


RULE  2.  The  rules  of  the  House  of  Representatives  of  the  Fifty- 
fourth  Congress  shall  be  the  rules  of  the  Convention  so  far  as  they  are 
applicable  and  not  inconsistent  with  the  following  rules : 

RULE  3.  When  the  previous  question  shall  be  demanded  by  a 
majority  of  the  delegates  from  any  State,  and  the  demand  seconded  by 
two  or  more  States,  and  the  call  sustained  by  a  majority  of  the  Conven- 
tion, the  question  shall  then  be  proceeded  with  and  disposed  of  accord- 
ing to  the  rules  of  the  House  of  Representatives  in  similar  cases. 

RULE  4.  A  motion  to  suspend  the  rules  shall  be  in  order  only  when 
made  by  authority  of  a  majority  of  the  delegates  from  any  State,  and 
seconded  by  a  majority  of  the  delegates  from  not  less  than  two  other 
States. 

RULE  5.  It  shall  be  in  order  to  lay  on  the  table  a  proposed  amend- 
ment to  a  pending  measure,  and  such  motion,  if  adopted,  shall  not 
carry  with  it  or  prejudice  such  measure. 

RULE  6.  Upon  all  subjects  before  the  Convention,  the  States  shall 
be  called  in  alphabetical  order,  and  next  the  Territories,  Alaska  and  the 
District  of  Columbia. 

RULE  7.  The  report  of  the  Committee  on  Credentials  shall  be  dis- 
posed of  before  the  report  of  the  Committee  on  Resolutions  is  acted 
upon,  and  the  report  of  the  Committee  on  Resolutions  shall  be  disposed 
of  before  the  Convention  proceeds  to  the  nomination  of  candidates  for 
President  and  Vice-President. 

RULE  8.  When  a  majority  of  the  delegates  of  any  two  States  shall 
demand  that  a  vote  be  recorded,  the  same  shall  be  taken  by  States, 
Territories,  Alaska  and  the  District  of  Columbia,  the  Secretary  calling 
the  roll  of  the  States  and  Territories,  Alaska  and  the  District  of  Colum- 
bia in  the  order  heretofore  established. 

RULE  9.  In  making  the  nominations  for  President  and  Vice-Presi- 
dent, in  no  case  shall  the  calling  of  the  roll  be  dispensed  with.  When 
it  appears  at  the  close  of  any  roll-call  that  any  candidate  has  received 
a  majority  of  all  the  votes  to  which  the  Convention  is  entitled,  the 
President  of  the  Convention  shall  announce  the  question  to  be  :  "  Shall 
the  nomination  of  the  candidate  be  made  unanimous?"  If  no  candi- 
date shall  have  received  such  majority,  the  chair  shall  direct  the  vote 
to  be  taken  again,  which  shall  be  repeated  until  some  candidate 
shall  have  received  a  majority  of  the  votes ;  and  when  any  State  has 
announced  its  vote  it  shall  so  stand  unless  in  case  of  numerical  error. 

RULE  10.  In  the  record  of  the  votes  by  States,  the  vote  of  each 
State,  Territory,  Alaska  and  the  District  of  Columbia  shall  be  announced 
by  the  chairman ;  and  in  case  the  vote  of  any  State,  Territory,  Alaska 
or  District  of  Columbia  shall  be  divided,  the  chairman  shall  announce 
the  number  of  votes  cast  for  any  candidate,  or  for  or  against  any  prop- 
osition ;  but,  if  exception  is  taken  by  any  delegate  to  the  correctness  of 
such  announcement  by  the  chairman  of  his  delegation,  the  President 
of  the  Convention  shall  direct  the  roll  of  members  of  such  delegation  to 
be  called,  and  the  result  shall  be  recorded  in  accordance  with  the  votes 
individually  given. 


238  APPENDICES. 

RULE  n.  No  member  shall  speak  more  than  once  upon  the  same 
question,  nor  longer  than  five  minutes,  unless  by  leave  of  the  Conven- 
tion, except  in  the  presentation  of  the  names  of  candidates. 

RULE  12.  A  Republican  National  Committee  shall  be  appointed,  to 
consist  of  one  member  from  each  State,  Territory,  Alaska  and  the  Dis- 
trict of  Columbia.  The  roll  shall  be  called  and  the  delegation  from 
each  State,  Territory,  Alaska  and  the  District  of  Columbia  shall  name, 
through  its  chairman,  a  person  who  shall  act  as  a  member  of  such 
committee.  Such  committee  shall  issue  the  call  for  the  meeting  of  the 
National  Convention  within  sixty  days  at  least  before  the  time  fixed  for 
said  meeting,  and  each  Congressional  District  in  the  United  States  shall 
elect  its  delegates  to  the  National  Convention  in  the  same  way  as  the 
nomination  for  a  member  of  Congress  is  made  in  said  district,  and  in 
Territories  the  delegates  to  the  Convention  shall  be  elected  in  the  same 
way  as  the  nomination  of  a  delegate  to  Congress  is  made,  and  said 
National  Committee  shall  prescribe  the  mode  of  selecting  the  delegates 
for  the  District  of  Columbia.  An  alternate  delegate  for  each  delegate 
to  the  National  Convention,  to  act  in  case  of  the  absence  of  the  dele- 
gate, shall  be  elected  in  the  same  manner  and  at  the  same  time  as  the 
delegate  is  elected.  Delegates  at  large  for  each  State,  and  their 
alternates,  shall  be  elected  by  State  Conventions  in  their  respective 
States. 

RULE  13.  The  Republican  National  Committee  is  authorized  and 
empowered  to  select  an  Executive  Committee,  to  consist  of  nine  mem- 
bers, who  may  or  may  not  be  members  of  the  National  Committee. 

RULE  14.  All  resolutions  relating  to  the  platform  shall  be  referred 
to  the  Committee  on  Resolutions  without  debate. 

RULE  15.  No  persons,  except  members  of  the  several  delegations 
and  officers  of  the  Convention,  shall  be  admitted  to  that  section  of  the 
hall  apportioned  to  delegates. 

RULE  1 6.  The  Convention  shall  proceed  in  the  following  order  of 
business : 

First — Report  of  the  Committee  on  Credentials. 

Second —  Report  of  the  Committee  on  Permanent  Organization. 

Third —  Report  of  the  Committee  on  Resolutions. 

Fourth  —  Naming  members  of  National  Committee. 

Fifth  —  Presentation  of  names  of  candidates  for  President. 

Sixth  —  Balloting. 

Seventh  —  Presentation  of  names  of  candidates  for  Vice- President. 

Eighth  —  Balloting. 

Ninth  —  Call  of  roll  of  States,  Territories,  Alaska  and  the  District  of 
Columbia  for  names  of  delegates  to  serve  respectively  on  committees  to 
notify  the  nominees  for  President  and  Vice- President  of  their  selection 
for  said  office. 

NOTE.  —  With  the  exception  of  Rule  4,  and  the  ninth  step  in  the  order 
of  business,  which  are  new  matter,  the  above  rules  are  almost  identical  with 
the  rules  adopted  by  the  Republican  Convention  of  1892.  (cf.  "Official  Pro- 
ceedings" of  the  Minneapolis  Convention.  29-31.) 


APPENDIX  D. 


APPENDIX   D. 


239 


I. 

RULES    OF    THE    REPUBLICAN    CITY    COMMITTEE    OF 
CAMBRIDGE,   MASS.    (ADOPTED  JULY  8,  1892.) 

[NOTE.  — The  provisions  in  regard  to  enrolment  were  added  in  1893.] 

Organization  and  Membership. 

1.  The  name  of  this  organization  shall  be  "THE  REPUBLICAN  CITY 
COMMITTEE  OF  CAMBRIDGE." 

2.  The  members  shall  be  the  members  of  the   Republican  Ward 
Committees  of  the  several  Wards  of  Cambridge,  each  Ward  of  the  city 
being  entitled  to  seven  members. 

3.  All  members  shall  be  Republicans  and  qualified  voters   in  the 
respective  Wards  from  which  they  are  elected.    They  shall  be  chosen 
annually  at  the  caucus  which  is  held  for  the  purpose  of  electing  dele- 
gates to  the  State  Convention,  and  shall  hold  office  during  the  year  for 
which  they  are  elected,  and  until  their  successors  have  organized.   They 
shall  meet  for  organization  during  the  month  of  January. 

4.  Fifteen  members  shall  constitute  a  quorum  of  the  Committee. 

5.  In  case  of  a  vacancy  in   any  Ward    Committee,  the   remaining 
members  of  such  Committee  shall  nominate  a  candidate  to  fill  such 
vacancy  and  present  his  name  to  the  general  Committee  for  election 
to  membership. 

6.  The  City  Committee  shall  have  charge  of  the  political  campaigns 
of  the  Republican  Party  of  Cambridge,  calling   the  caucuses  of  that 
party,  establishing   rules,  under  the  laws  of  the   Commonwealth,  for 
the   guidance  of  the  same,  and  shall  discharge  such  other  duties  as 
properly  belong  to  it  in  furthering  the  interests  of  the  Party  which  it 
represents. 

Officers. 

7.  The  Officers  shall  be  as  follows,  namely :  A  President,  a  Secretary, 
and  a  Treasurer.    They  shall  be  elected  each  year  at  the  first  meeting 
of  the  Committee.    They  shall  be  chosen  by  ballot,  and  a  majority  of 
the   votes   cast   shall   be  necessary  for  their  election.     In  case  of  a 
vacancy  in  any  such  office,  it  may  be  filled  at  any  subsequent  meeting 
of  the  Committee,  notice  of  the  proposed  action  having  been  stated  in 
the  call  for  the  same. 


240 


APPENDICES. 


Committees. 


8.  The  Committees  shall  be  as  follows,  namely  :  An  Executive  Com- 
mittee, consisting  of  five  members  one  from  each  Ward  together  with 
the  President,  Secretary,  and  Treasurer,  Members  ex  offuio. 

9.  A  Finance  Committee,  consisting  of  one  member  from  each  Ward 
Committee. 

10.  An  Auditing  Committee,  consisting  of  three  members  of  the  City 
Committee. 

11.  The   Executive,   Finance   and   Auditing   Committees   shall   be 
chosen  at  the  aforesaid  first  meeting  and  in  such  manner  as  those 
present  may  determine. 

12.  Where  a  Committee  is  to  consist  of  one  Representative  from  each 
Ward,  the  Ward  Committee  shall  nominate  its  own  Representative. 

Duties  of  Officers. 

13.  The  President  shall  see  that  arrangements  are  made  for  the  calling 
of  all  necessary  meetings  of  the  City  Committee,  and  shall  preside  over 
the  same.     He  shall  also  preside  over  the  meetings  held  by  the  Execu- 
tive Committee,  and  shall  exercise  a  general  supervision  over  the  work 
of  the  City  Committee. 

14.  The  Secretary  shall  attend  to  the  keeping  of  the  Records  of  all 
meetings  of  the  City  Committee  (and  likewise  of  the  Executive  Com- 
mittee) in  suitable  books  furnished  to  him  for  that  purpose.     He  shall 
give  due  notice  of  all  meetings  to  be  held  by  the  City  Committee  and 
shall  perform  such  other  duties  which  are  assigned  to  him,  or  which 
devolve  upon  him  by  virtue  of  his  office.     All   such  Records  kept  by 
him  shall  be  the  property  of  the  City  Committee. 

15.  The  Treasurer  shall  receive  and  have  charge  of  all  moneys  col- 
lected for  the  use  of  the  City  Committee,  and  shall  pay  out  the  same  in 
such  manner  as  directed  by  vote  of  said  Committee.    He  shall,  in  suitable 
books,  provided  him  for  that  purpose,  keep  a  detailed  account  of  all 
moneys  received  and  disbursed  by  him,  and  shall  perform  the  ordinary 
duties  pertaining  to  the  office.     He  shall,  previous  to  the  first  day  of 
December,  in  each  year,  have  his  books  and  accounts  arranged  in  such 
manner  as  to  enable  an  examination  of  the  same  by  the  Auditing  Com- 
mittee.   On  or  before  the  first  day  of  January  of  each  year,  he  shall  file 
with  the  Secretary  a  written  statement  of  all  moneys  paid  out  by  him 
during  his  term  of  office,  and  the  purposes  for  which  said  moneys  were 
paid,  which  statement  shall  be  open  to  inspection  by  members  of  the 
Committee  and  by  contributors  to  the  campaign  fund.     The  books  and 
accounts  above  named  shall  be  the  property  of  the  City  Committee. 

Duties  of  Committees. 

1 6.  The  Executive  Committee    shall   perform   such   duties   as   are 
assigned  to  them  by  vote  of  the  City  Committee,  and  shall  from  time 
to  time  take  such  action  as  they  shall  deem  to  be  for  the  best  interests 
of  the  Republican  Party. 


APPENDIX  D. 


241 


17.  The  Finance  Committee    shall   assist  in   raising  all   necessary 
funds  for  campaign  purposes  and  cause  the  same  to  be  paid  to  the 
Treasurer. 

1 8.  The  Auditing  Committee  shall,  after  the  first  day  in  December 
in  each  year,  examine  the  books  and  accounts  of  the  Treasurer,  and,  if 
found  to  be  correct  shall  certify  the  same  to  the  Treasurer,  on  or  before 
the  1 5th  of  December,  in  writing,  and  shall  also  report  their  findings  to 
the  City  Committee. 

Contested  Elections. 

19.  In  all  contested  elections  to  Ward  Committees,  the  contestants 
shall  file  with  the  Secretary  of  the  City  Committee,  on  or  before  the 
first  day  of  January  thereafter,  a  petition  setting  forth  all  alleged  irregu- 
larities by  reason  of  which  the  contest  is  claimed. 

20.  A  hearing  shall  be  given  to  such  contestants  within  fourteen  days 
after  such  petition  has  been  filed,  notice  being  duly  served  by  the  Secre- 
tary of  the  City  Committee  upon  the  party  whose  election  is  contested. 
The  hearing  upon  such  petition  shall  be  confined  to  the  allegations  con- 
tained therein,  and  the  decision  of  the  City  Committee  shall  be  final  in 
the  matter. 

Caucuses. 

2 1 .  The  time  and  number  of  caucuses  to  be  held,  and  the  rules  that 
shall  govern  the  same,  shall  be  determined  from  time  to  time  by  a  vote 
of  the  City  Committee. 

Senatorial  District  Committee. 

22.  In  case  any  Senatorial  Convention  shall  fail  to  appoint  a  Sena- 
torial   District   Committee,    the  City  Committee   shall    constitute   the 
Senatorial  District  Committee. 

In   General. 

23.  Meetings  of  the  several  Ward  Committees  shall  be  called  by  the 
Chairman  giving  due  notice  to  each  member  thereof. 

24.  If  any  member  of  the  City  Committee  absents  himself  from  three 
consecutive  meetings  of  the  Committee,  of  which  he  has  had  due  notice, 
without  a  satisfactory  excuse,  his  place  may  be  declared  vacant  by  vote 
of  a  majority  of  the  City  Committee  and  such  vacancy  shall  be  filled  as 
hereinbefore  provided  for  filling  vacancies  in  any  Ward  Committee. 

25.  The  words  "City  Committee"  herein  used  shall  be  construed  as 
meaning  The  Republican  City  Committee. 

26.  These  rules,  or  any  portion  of  them,  may  be  suspended  at  any 
meeting  by  a  three-fourths  vote  of  the  members  present. 

27.  The  foregoing  rules  may  be  amended   at  any  meeting,  notice 
having  been  given  at  the  previous  meeting,  by  vote  of  a  majority  of  the 
whole  City  Committee. 

16 


242  APPENDICES. 

28.  No  member  of  the  City  Committee  shall  hold  a  position  in  any 
political  committee  or  convention  for  the  nomination  of  candidates  for 
public  office  excepting  such  caucuses  and  conventions  governing  the 
nomination  of  candidates  for  municipal  offices,  under  the  present  exist- 
ing non-partisan  system,  other  than  a  regularly  called  Republican  Con- 
vention, nor  assist  in  the  election  of  any  candidate  in  opposition  to 
the  regular  Republican  nominee,  or  receive  remuneration  for  political 
services  rendered  candidates,  or  be  guilty  of  any  act  or  misconduct 
unbecoming  his  position  as  a  member  of  the  City  Committee  without 
forfeiting  his  right  to  membership  therein.     In  either  event  his  place 
upon  the  Committee  may  be  declared  vacant  by  vote  of  a  majority  of 
the  whole  City  Committee,  and  such  vacancy  may  be  filled  as  herein- 
before provided  for  the  election  of  members  to  fill  vacancies. 

Enrolment  of  Voters. 

29.  Every  Republican  in  the  city  of  Cambridge  shall  be  entitled  to 
have  his  name  enrolled  on  the  list  of  Republican  Voters  of  the  Ward  in 
which  he  is  a  legal  voter.    Enrolment  shall  be  made  by  marking  with 
ink  the  letter  R  at  the  left  of  and  against  the  name  of  each  Republican 
on  the  printed  list  published  by  the  Registrars  of  Voters.     No  change 
shall  be  made  in  such  enrolment  except  by  consent  of  a  majority  of 
the  Ward  Committee  and  no  person  whose  name  is  not  so  enrolled 
shall  be  allowed  to  vote  at  a  Republican  Caucus,  except  as  hereinafter 
provided. 

30.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the   Republican  Committee   of  each 
Ward,  prior  to  the  first  day  of  September  in  each  year,  to  place  upon 
the  said  enrolled  list  of  Republican  Voters  of  the  Ward  the  names  of 
all  known  Republicans  entitled  to  vote  therein,  so  far  as  they  can  be 
ascertained. 

31.  Any  legal  voter  of  the  Ward  may  file  with  any  member  of  the 
Ward  Committee   (at  least  two  days  before  the  Caucus)  his   written 
declaration  that  he  is  a  Republican  in  politics,  accompanied  by  a  state- 
ment in  writing,  signed  by  three  enrolled  Republican  Voters  of  the 
Ward,  that,  according  to  their  knowledge  and  belief,  the  person  named 
by  them  is  a  Republican  and  entitled  to  vote  at  Republican  Caucuses 
held  in  the  Ward,  and  his  name  shall  be  enrolled,  unless  a  majority  of 
the  Ward  Committee  shall,  for  cause,  otherwise  decide. 

32.  In  case  any  Republican  who  is  a  voter  in  the  Ward,  whose  name 
has  been  omitted  from  the  said  enrolled  list,  attends  a  Republican  Cau- 
cus and  expresses  a  desire  to  vote  therein,  his  name  shall  be  placed 
upon  said  list  and  he  be  allowed  to  vote,  provided  that  such  person  is 
adjudged  to  be  a  Republican  in  politics  by  a  majority  of  the  Ward 
Committee  present,  and  shall  sign,  if  requested  by  such  Committee,  a 
declaration  to  the  effect  that  he  is  a  Republican  in  politics. 

33.  The  Secretary  or  any  other  member  of  the  City  Committee  shall 
furnish  blanks  to  voters  who  desire  to  file  applications  and  declarations 
as  aforesaid.    All  declaration  papers  shall  be  sent  by  the  several  Chair- 


APPENDIX  D. 


243 


men  to  the  Secretary  of  the  City  Committee,  who  shall  preserve  the 
same  for  future  reference. 

34.  The  City  Committee  shall  afford  convenient   opportunities  for 
enrolment  and  give  due  notice  thereof. 

35.  The  Executive  Committee  shall  have  power  to  erase  from  the 
list  of  enrolled  voters  aforesaid  the  name  of  any  person  who  they  find  is 
not  a  Republican,  providing  two-thirds  of  those  present   and  voting 
shall  so  vote,  opportunity  for  a  hearing  being  first  given  such  person 
before  the  full  Executive  Committee  or  a  Sub-Committee  thereof.    The 
Secretary  of  the  City  Committee  shall  notify  the  Chairman  of  the  Ward 
Committee  of  any  erasures  made. 

36.  Any  enrolled  Republican  who  allows  his  name  to  be  placed  in 
nomination  in  opposition  to  the  regular  nominees  of  the  Caucus  shall 
have  his  name  stricken  from  the  enrolled  list  for  two  years. 

37.  Ten  days  before  the  holding  of  the  Republican  State  Convention 
in  each  year,  and  at  such  other  times  as  the  President  and  Secretary  of 
the  City  Committee  may  require,  the  Chairman  of  each  Ward  Commit- 
tee shall  cause  to  be  filed  with  the  Secretary  of  the  City  Committee  a 
copy  of  the  list  of  the  enrolled  voters  in  their  respective  Wards  and  of 
additions  thereto,  together  with  all  declaration  papers  which  have  been 
filed,  all  of  which  shall  be  for  the  use  of  the  City  Committee  and  of 
succeeding  Ward  Committees. 

38.  Against  the  names  of  those  voters  who  have  been  enrolled  upon 
their  own  declaration  shall  be  placed  the  letter  O.     The  said  enrolled 
list  shall  be  for  the  use  of  the  City  Committee  only  and  subject  to  any 
regulations  which  the  President  and  Secretary  may  prescribe  for  its  care 
and  preservation. 


244 


APPENDICES. 


II. 


BLANK    USED    IN   CASE    OF    ENROLMENT    PREVIOUS    TO 
THE   HOLDING   OF  THE  CAUCUS. 

Cambridge, j8g 

I  hereby  declare  that  I  am  a  Republican  in  politics,  and  being 

a  qualified  voter  in  Ward ,  request  that  my  name  be  added 

to  the  list  of  enrolled  Republicans  in  said  Ward. 

(Sign  on  this  line) 

Number Street. 

CAMBRIDGE, 189 

SZSe,  t!)e  SSn&er«fjJ1U&,  being  enrolled  Republican  voters  of 

Cambridge,  in  the  same  Ward  with ,  the 

applicant  above  named,  hereby  certify  that  to  our  best  knowledge  and 
belief  the  said  applicant  is  a  Republican  in  politics  and  entitled  to  vote 
at  Republican  Caucuses  in  said  Ward. 

....No....  ...Street. 


President. 

Secretary. 

Treasurer. 

Republican  City  Committee  of  Cambridge. 


ej    \AZard     Garrjrrjilfees. 

[Here  follow  the  names  and  addresses  of  the  chairmen  of  the  different 
Ward  Committees.] 


Ila.     BLANK    USED    IN    CASE   OF    ENROLMENT    ON    THE 
NIGHT  OF  THE   CAUCUS. 


$  httofy  ckctate  4ka4  $  am  a  SltjiuLlvcan  in  fiofide*  and 
fxina  a  yuafajied  volet  in  Watd  .....................  .....  t#]utd  4ha4  my 

name  6t  added  4o  4lw,  foJ  cj  entolUd  &<jwMitan*  in  laid  *Watd. 

Name  ........................................................................ 

No...  Street. 


APPENDIX  E. 


APPENDIX    E. 

FORMS  USED   UNDER  THE  AUSTRALIAN  BALLOT 

ACTS. 


I. 

CERTIFICATE  OF   NOMINATION   FOR  STATE   OFFICES, 
MASSACHUSETTS. 

(Last  day  and  hour  for  filing  this  certificate  with  Secretary  of  the  Commonwealth,  Monday, 
October  9,  1S'J3,  5  r.  *.) 


0f 


STATE   CONVENTION    CERTIFICATE   OF    NOMINATION. 


We  certify  that  a  convention  of  delegates,  who  were  selected  in  caucuses 
called  and  held  in  accordance  with  the  requirements  of  the  Election  Act 

of  1893,  representing  the party,  a  party  which  at 

the  last  preceding  annual  election  polled  at  least  three  per  centum  of 
the  entire  vote  cast  in  the  Commonwealth  for  Governor,  was  held  for  the 
Commonwealth  at. on  the day  of.. ,  1893, 

(City  or  Town.) 

and  the  following  nominations  of  candidates  for  state  offices  were  made, 
to  be  voted  for  in  the  Commonwealth  on  the  ith  day  of  November,  1893, 
viz. :  — 

Offices  to  be  filled.       Names  of  Candidates.   (City  or  Town.  Street     Par&  °?  Po'tttcal 

and  No.,  if  any.)  Uestgnatton. 

Governor 

Lieutenant  Governor, 
Secretary,  .... 

Treasurer 

Auditor,     .... 
Attorney-General,     . 
(Print  or  write  all  the  abore  entries  very  plainly.     Send  a  printed  ballot.) 

Presiding  Officer  of  Convention. 

(Name.) 

(Residence,  City  or  Town.     Street  and  No.,  if  any.) 

Secretary  of  Convention. 

(Name.) 

(Residence,  City  or  Town.   Street  and  No.,  if  any.) 


246  APPENDICES. 

COMMONWEALTH  OF  MASSACHUSETTS. 


JJ.  1893. 

Then  personally  appeared  the  above-named Presiding 

Officer,  and. Secretary,  and  severally  made  oath  that  the 

foregoing  certificate,  by  them  signed,  is  true  io  the  best  of  their  knowledge 
and  belief. 

Before  me 

justice  of  tbt  Ttat* 


II. 

CERTIFICATE  OF  NOMINATION    (CONGRESSIONAL 
CONVENTION),   RHODE   ISLAND. 

To  be  filed  in  the  Secretary  of  State's  Office  at  least  16  day*  previous  to  the  day  of  Election. 

State  0f  Sfrofce  $slan0  ana  $r0bi0«n«  ^plantations. 


CONVENTION   CERTIFICATE   OF   NOMINATION. 


We  certify  that  a  convention  of  the  qualified  delegates  of  the. 


Congressional  District  of  the  State  of  Rhode  Island  was  called  and  held 
in  accordance  with  the  provisions  of  Chapter  731  of  the  Public  Laws, 

passed  March  29,  1889,  at in  the  city  of 

Providence,  on  the day  of  October,  1 890,  and  the  following 

nomination  was  made  for  a  Representative  to  represent  said 

Congressional  District  in  the  Fifty-Second  Congress  of  the  United  States. 


NAME  OF  CANDIDATE. 

Party  or  Political  Principle  Rep- 
resented. 

RESIDENCE. 
Town  or  City,  Street  and 
Number. 

ty  Print  or  write  all  the  abore  names  rery  distinctly. 

PrtaJuw  OtS&r  of  Comoodiam. 

(Name.) 


(Residence,  City  or  Town,  Street  and  No.,  If  any.) 

Secretary  of  Comtniion, 


(Name.) 


fJtoMMim.  City  or  Town,  Street  and  No.,  if  any.1 


APPENDIX  E. 


247 


State  of  $Mr  |s!anb  anb  ^robibence  plantations. 
County,  sc.  October 1890. 


Then  personally  appeared  the  above  named. 


Presiding  Officer,  and Secretary,  and  severally 

made  oath  that  the  foregoing  certificate  by  them  signed,  is  true  to  the  best 
of  their  knowledge  and  belief. 

Before  me, 

Notary  Public. 


III. 

CERTIFICATE   OF   NOMINATION,  —  JUDGE   OF  THE 
COURT  OF  APPEALS,  —  MISSOURI. 

CERTIFICATE   OF    NOMINATION. 


STATE  OF  MISSOURI, 

DEPARTMENT  OF  STATE. 


Ckrh  of  %  -  Counttj  Court  ••••<§mim0  : 

In  compliance  with  the  provisions  of  Section  4767,  Revised 
Statutes  of  Missouri,  1889,  /,  ALEXANDER  A.  LESdEdR, 
Secretary  of  State,  hereby  certify  that  JACKSON  L.  SMITH  of 
the  County  of  Cole,  whose  occupation  is  that  of  an  Attorney  at  Law, 
was,  on  the  28//z  day  of  June,  1892,  duly  nominated  to  the  office  of 
Judge  of  the  Kansas  City  Court  of  Appeals  within  and  for  the 
Kansas  City  Court  of  Appeals  district  of  the  State  of  Missouri,  by 
a  delegate  convention  of  the  DEMOCRATIC  PARTY  of  said 
district,  as  shown  by  the  certificate  of  his  said  nomination  on  file, 
as  the  law  directs,  in  this  office.  And  I  do  further  certify  that  the 
said  political  party  polled,  as  a  party,  at  the  last  general  election 
before  such  convention,  at  least  three  per  cent,  of  the  entire  vote 
cast  in  said  district  for  which  said  nomination  is  made. 

IN  TESTIMONY  WHEREOF,  I  hereunto  set  my  hand 
and  affix  the  Great  seal  of  the  State  of  Missouri. 
Done  at  the  City  of  Jefferson,  this  Twenty-first  day 
of  October  One  Thousand  Eight  Hundred  and 
Ninety-two. 

Secretary  of  State. 


248 


APPENDICES. 


IV. 


CERTIFICATE  OF  NOMINATION  FOR  ALL  OFFICES,  IOWA. 
8««.  4,  Chapter  33,  LAWS  Twenty- Fourth  General  Assembly. 

STATE    OK    IOWA. 

Certificate  of  Nomination,  for Offices. 

(State.  District,  County  or  Muleiptlitv. ) 

BBC.  4.  Auy  convention  of  delegates,  primary,  caucus  or  meeting  representing  •  political  party, 
which  »t  the  general  election  next  preceding  polled  at  least  two  (2)  per  cent  of  the  entire  rote  cart 
in  the  state  or  diriition  thereof,  or  municipality  for  which  the  nomination  ia  made,  may  for  the  state 
or  division  thereof,  or  municipality  for  which  the  convention,  primary,  caucus  or  meeting  is  held, 
aa  the  case  may  be,  by  causing  a  certificate  of  nomination  to  be  duly  filed,  make  one  such  nomina- 
tion for  each  office  therein  to  be  filled  at  the  election.  Rrery  such  certificate  of  nomination  shall 
state  such  facts  as  are  required  in  section  6  of  this  act,  and  shall  be  signed  by  the  presiding  officer 
and  by  the  secretary  of  the  convention,  caucus  or  meeting,  who  shall  add  to  their  signatures  their 
places  of  residence.  Where  such  nomination  is  made  by  a  primary  election  the  certificate  shall  be 
signed  by  the  board  of  canvassers,  to  which  the  returns  of  such  primary  are  made.  Such  certificate 
shall  be  sworn  to  by  them  to  be  true,  to  the  best  of  their  knowledge  and  belief,  and  a  certificate  of 
the  oath  shall  be  annexed  to  the  certificate  of  nomination. 

SBC.  6.  All  certificates  of  nomination,  or  nomination  papers,  shall,  besides  containing  the  names 
of  candidates,  specify  as  to  each  : 

1.  The  office  to  which  he  is  nominated. 

2.  The  party  or  political  principle  which  he  represents,  expressed  in  not  more  than  five  (5)  words. 

3.  His  place  of  residence,  with  street  and  number  thereof,  if  any. 

We,  the  undersigned,  in  accordance  with  the  law  relating  thereto,  do 

hereby  certify  that  at  a held  for  that  purpose  in  the 

of. ,  State  of  'Iowa, 

on  the day  of. ,189    ,  the  following  nominations 

were  made  for  the  offices  herein  designated,  viz. : 


OFFICB  TO  u  FILLED. 

NAME  OF  CAHMDATM. 

PABTT. 

RBUDWCB. 

We  also  certify  that,  at  the  last  preceding  general  election,  the  entire 

vote  cast  in  the was of  which  the 

party  polled votes,  being  more  than  two  per  cent  of  the 

entire  vote  cast  in  said....  ....at  said  election. 


of. ,  Iowa. 

Chairmen  of  the  Convention. 


of. ,  Iowa, 

Secretary  of  the  Convention. 

8Ut«  of  Iowa,  County,  n.     Personally  appeared  before  me  this 

day  of 189  , whose  name  is  subscribed 

to  the  above  certificate,  who  being  duly  sworn,  on  oath  says,  that  the 
same  is  true  to  the  best  of  his  knowledge  and  belief. 


Notary  Public. 

Bute  of  Iow»,  County,  w.     Personally  appeared  before  me  this 

day  of 189  , whose  name  is  subscribed 

to  the  above  certificate,  who  being  duly  sworn,  on  oath  says,  that  the 
same  is  true  to  the  best  of  his  knowledge  and  belief. 

HoUry  Public. "' 


APPENDIX  E. 
(On  the  reverse.} 


249 


Certificate  of  Nomination, 

STATE  OF  IOWA,         ^ 
County.  J 

Election  of  .189 


Filed  in  my  office  this, 
day  of 


.189 


SEC.  7.  CERTIFICATES  or  NOMINATION,  and  nomination  papers  for  the 
nomination  of  candidates  for  offices  to  be  filled  by  the  electors  of  the 
entire  state,  or  any  division  or  district  greater  than  a  county,  shall  be 
filed  with  the  secretary  of  state  not  more  than  sixty  days  (60)  and  not 
less  than  thirty  (30)  days  before  the  day  fixed  by  law  for  the  election 
for  which  the  candidates  are  nominated.  All  other  certificates  for  the 
nomination  of  candidates  shall  be  filed  with  the  county  auditor  of  the 
respective  counties,  not  more  than  sixty  (60)  days  and  not  less  than 
twenty  (20)  days  previous  to  the  day  of  such  election ;  provided,  that 
certificates  of  nomination  and  nomination  papers  for  the  nomination  of 
candidates  for  the  offices  in  cities  and  incorporated  towns  shall  be  filed 
with  the  clerks  or  recorder  of  the  cities  or  incorporated  towns  not  more 
than  forty  (40)  days  and  not  less  than  ten  (10)  days  previous  to  such 
election. 


250 


APPENDICES. 

V. 


FORM   OF  NOMINATION  PAPER   IN   PARLIAMENTARY 
ELECTIONS. 


(Statutes  Revised,  XVI.,  935.) 


We,  the  undersigned,  A.  B.  of, 
and  C.  D.  of_ 


.in  the. 
.in  the. 


.,  being  electors  for  the. 


•of- 


do  hereby  nominate  the  following  person  as  a  proper  person  to  serve  as 
member  for  the  said in  Parliament ; 


BUM  AM*. 

OTHER  NAMU. 

ABODE. 

RAHK,  Pmormuiov 

OR  OCCUTATIOM. 

Brown 

John  

52  George  St.,  Bristol. 

Merchant. 

Jones 

or 

William  David, 

High  Elms,  Wilts. 

Esquire. 

Merton 

or 

Hon.  George  Davis, 

Commonly  called  Viscount, 

Sanworth,  Berks. 

Viscount. 

Smith 

or 

Henry  Sydney, 

72  High  St.,  Bath. 

Attorney. 

(Signed)  A.  B. 

CD. 


We,  the  undersigned,  being  registered  electors  of  the. 


do  hereby  assent  to  the  nomination  of  the  above-mentioned  John  Brown 
as  a  proper  person  to  seme  as  member  for  the  said in 

Parliament. 

(Signed)  E.  F.  of 
G.  H.  of 
I.  J.  of 
K.  L.  of 
M.  N.  of 
O.  P.  of 
Q.  R.  of 
S.  T.  of 


APPENDIX  E.  251 

VI. 

FORM   OF   NOMINATION   PAPER  FOR  OTHER  THAN 
STATE   OFFICES,   MASSACHUSETTS. 

(LiMt  day  and  hour  for  filing  nomination  papers  with  Secretary  of  the  Commonwealth:   State, 
Monday,  October  16,  1893,  5  P.  M.  ;  District,  Friday,  October  20,  1893,  6  p.  M.) 


0f 


NOMINATION    PAPER. 

The  undersigned,  qualified  voters  of  the  Commonwealth  and  of 
the  electoral  district  or  division  for  which  the  nomination  is  made, 
in  accordance  with  the  provisions  of  the  Election  Act  of  1893, 
make  the  following  nomination  of  a  candidate  for  the  office  of 
-  to  be  voted  for  in  the  _ 

(Exact  title  of  office.  )  (Exact  title  of  district,  if  in  a  district.) 

on  the  Jth  day  of  November,  1893,  vis.  :  — 

Name  of  Candidate,  -  —  _  . 

Residence,  .  -  _  __ 

(City  or  Town.    Street  and  No.,  if  any.) 
Party  or  Political  Designaliotir- 


(Print  or  write  all  the  above  entries  very  plainly.) 

We  certify  that  we  have  not  subscribed  to  more  nominations  of  candidates  for  this  office 
than  there  are  persons  to  be  elected  thereto.. 


SIGNATURES. 
(To  be  made  in  person.) 

RESIDENCES. 
(City  or  Town.     Street  and  No.,  if  any. 

COMMONWEALTH  OF  MASSACHUSETTS. 


ss.  1893. 

Then  personally  appeared one  of  the  signers 

to  the  above  nomination  paper,  and  made  oatli  that  the  statements 
therein  contained  are  true  to  the  best  of  his  knowledge  and  belief, 

and  that  his  post  office  address  is 

Before  me, 


Justice  of  the  Peace. 


APPENDICES. 

VII. 

INSTRUCTIONS  ACCOMPANYING   NOMINATION  PAPER 

FOR  STATE  OFFICES   ISSUED   BY  SECRETARY 

OF  STATE,   MASSACHUSETTS, 

(fommonfocaltb  of  Jthssiubusctts. 
ernes  OP  THE  SECRETARY. 

1803. 


NOMINATION  OF  CANDIDATES  FOR  STATE  OfnCES  BY   NOMINATION  PAPERS. 

In  order  to  ascertain  the  number  of  signatures  required  to 
make  a  nomination,  the  Secretary  of  the  Commonwealth  should 
be  informed  as  to  the  office,  district,  etc.,  for  which  the  paper 
is  to  be  used. 

The  exact  titles  of  offices  and  district,  the  names  and  resi- 
dences of  candidates  and  the  political  designation  should  be 
entered  in  the  proper  places  at  the  head  of  the  paper  before 
any  signature  is  placed  thereon. 

All  signatures  must  be  made  in  person,  and  the  residence, 
city  or  town,  street  and  number  (if  any),  must  be  written  in 
full  against  each  signature. 

If  the  word  "  Republican  "  or  the  word  "  Democrat "  is  used 
in  the  political  designation,  it  must  be  the  first  word  thereon, 
and  but  one  additional  word  can  be  used  in  such  a  case.  The 
words  "  Nom.  Paper  "  should  be  added  at  the  end  of  such  desig- 
nation. If  such  party  names  are  not  used  three  words  may  be 
used  in  the  political  designation. 

The  required  number  of  signatures  must  be  certified  by  regis- 
trars of  voters  before  a  paper  is  filed. 

A  paper  made  up  by  pasting  several  pieces  of  paper  to- 
gether, or  on  which  there  are  erasures  or  changes  will  not  be 
filed  and  accepted  except  when  satisfactory  evidence  is  produced 
that  such  erasures  or  changes  were  made  with  the  knowledge 
and  consent  of  the  signers  to  such  paper. 

A  written  acceptance  of  the  candidate  must  be  filed  with  the 
nomination  paper  or  papers  bearing  the  required  number  of 
certified  signatures. 


APPENDIX  E.  253 

VIIL 
NOMINATION  PAPER  FOR  ALL  OFFICES,   IOWA. 

Sec,  Si  Chapter  33,  Laws  Twenty-Fourth  General  Assembly. 

NOMINATION    PAPBR. 

SECTION  5.  Nominations  for  candidates  for  any  office  to  be  filled  by  the  voters  of  the  State  at 
large,  may  be  made  by  nomination  papers  signed  in  the  aggregate  for  each  candidate  by  not  less  than 
five  hundred  (500)  qualified  voters  of  the  State.  Nominations  of  candidates  for  offices  to  be  filed  by  the 
electors  of  a  county,  district  or  other  division  less  than  a  State  may  be  made  by  nomination  papers, 


candidate  by  not  less  than  ten  (10)  qualified  voters  of  such  city,  town,  precinct  or  ward ;  provided, 
that  the  name  of  any  candidate,  whose  name  may  appear  in  any  other  place  upon  the  ballot,  shall 
not  be  so  added  by  petition  for  the  same  office.  Each  elector  signing  a  certificate  shall  add  to  his 
signature  his  place  of  business  and  postoffice  address. 

The  undersigned  qualified  -voters  of  the 


in  accordance  with  the  laws  relating  thereto,  make  the  following  nomi- 
nations, viz. : 


Office  to  be  Filled. 

NAME  OP  CANDIDATE. 

PARTY. 

RESIDENCE. 

We  certify  that  we  have  not  subscribed  to  any  other  nominations  for 
these  offices. 


SIGNATURES. 


RESIDENCES 
(Town  or  City,  Street  and  Number,  if  any.) 


254 


APPENDICES. 
(On  the  reverse.) 


NOMINATION  PAPER. 


STATE   OF   IOWA, 

County. 

Election  of. 189 


Filed  in  my  office  this 
day  of. 


189 


SBCTION  7.  Certificates  of  nomination,  and  nomination  paper*  for 
the  nomination  of  candidates  for  offices  to  be  filed  by  the  electors  of 
the  entire  State,  or  any  division  or  district  greater  than  a  county,  shall 
be  filed  with  the  secretary  of  state  not  more  than  sixty  days  (GO)  and 
not  less  than  thirty  (30)  days  before  the  day  fixed  by  law  for  the  elec- 
tion for  which  the  candidates  are  nominated.  All  other  certificates  for 
the  nomination  of  candidates  shall  be  filed  with  the  county  auditor  of 
the  respective  counties,  not  more  than  sixty  (60)  days  and  not  less  than 
twenty  (20)  days  previous  to  the  day  of  such  election  ;  provided  that 
certificates  of  nomination  and  nomination  papers  for  the  nomination  of 
candidates  for  the  offices  in  cities  and  incorporated  towns  shall  be  filed 
with  the  clerks  or  recorder  of  the  cities  or  incorporated  towns  not  more 
than  forty  (40)  days  and  not  less  than  ten  (10)  days  previous  to  such 
election. 


APPENDIX  E.  255 

IX. 

BLANK  ACCEPTANCE  OF   CANDIDATE   NOMINATED   BY 
NOMINATION    PAPERS,    MASSACHUSETTS. 

COMMONWEALTH   OF   MASSACHUSETTS. 


1894. 

(Town,  month  and  day.) 

I  accept  the  nomination  as  a  candidate  for  the  office  of. 

(Exact  title  of  office.) 

to  be  voted  for  in  the  town  of on  the day  of 

,  1894,  said  nomination  being  made  by  the  nomination  paper 

filed  herewith,  as  required  by  the  Election  Act  of  1893. 

(Signature  of  candidate,  to  be  made  in  person.) 

(Residence,  street  and  number,  if  any.) 

In  presence  of 

(Signature  of  witness,  to  be  made  in  person.) 

(Residence,  street  and  number,  if  any.) 


256  APPENDICES. 

APPENDIX   F. 
FORMS   USED   IN   SPEAKERSHIP  CAMPAIGNS. 


i.  CALL  FOR  THE  REPUBLICAN  CAUCUS  TO  NOMINATE  A  CANDIDATE  FOR 
SPEAKER  OF  THE  MASSACHUSETTS  HOUSE  OF  REPRESENTATIVES,  1893 
-94,  MAILED  TO  EVERY  REPUBLICAN  MEMBER  OF  THE  HOUSE. 

We,  the  undersigned,  believe  in  calling  a  caucus  of  the  Republican 
representatives  elect  on  such  a  date  as  the  signers  of  the  call  may  sub- 
sequently determine  for  the  purpose  of  nominating  a  Speaker  of  the 
next  House  of  Representatives. 

[Here  follow  the  names  of  members-elect  desiring  a  caucus.] 

Sign  here 

Also  sign  the  card  stating  your  preference  as  to  date  and  time  of  caucus. 


2.  SAMPLE  CIRCULAR  USED  IN  THE  CAMPAIGN  FOR  THE  REPUBLICAN  NOM- 
INATION FOR  SPEAKER  OF  THE  MASSACHUSETTS  HOUSE  OF  REPRE- 
SENTATIVES, 1893-94.  A  COPY  OF  THIS  CIRCULAR  WAS  MAILED  TO 
EVERY  REPUBLICAN  MEMBER. 

DEAR  SIR:  — 

In  presenting  to  the  members  of  the  Legislature  of  1894  the  name  of 

,  of ,  as  a  candidate  for  Speaker,  we  desire  to  state  briefly 

some  of  his  qualifications  for  the  position. 

He  was  born  and  has  always  lived  in  Massachusetts,  was  educated  in 
the  public  schools  of  the  city  of  Newton  until  he  entered  Amherst  Col- 
lege, where  he  was  graduated  as  valedictorian  of  his  class,  in  1878. 

He  attended  Harvard  Law  School  two  years  and  Boston  University 
Law  School  one  year,  where  he  was  given  the  degree  LL.B.,  summa 
cum  laude,  in  1882.  In  that  year  he  was  admitted  to  the  bar,  and  has 
since  practised  his  profession  in  Boston. 

In  1886  he  became  an  instructor  in  Boston  University  Law  School, 
and  in  1891  he  was  appointed  a  professor  in  that  institution,  succeed- 


APPENDIX  F.  257 

ing  the  late  Elias  Merwin  as  lecturer  on  equity  jurisprudence  and 
pleading. 

In  1885  he  was  a  member  of  the  Common  Council  of  the  city  of 
Maiden,  and  in  1889,  1890  and  1891  he  was  City  Solicitor  of  the 
same  city. 

He  has  been  a  member  of  the  House  of  Representatives  for  the 
last  two  years,  having  served  upon  the  Committee  on  the  Judiciary  and 
the  Committee  on  Cities,  of  which  latter  Committee  he  was  House 
Chairman. 

While  not  hasty  in  forming  judgments,  he  has  decided  views  on  all 
the  important  subjects  which  come  before  the  Legislature,  and  has  the 
faculty  of  clearly  and  forcibly  stating  his  position.  He  is  well  versed  in 
Parliamentary  Law,  and  while  of  a  judicial  temperament,  can  think 
quickly  and  accurately.  He  has  several  times  occupied  the  Speaker's 
chair  acceptably. 

We  recommend  Mr. as  one  who  will  fill  the  position  of  Speaker 

with  honor  to  the  Commonwealth. 

Signed  by  six  representatives  as  a  Committee  of  Members-Elect. 


APPENDICES. 

APPENDIX   G. 
THE  MASSACHUSETTS  CAUCUS  LAW. 


[NOTE.  —  Certain  minor  changes  in  these  Acts  were  made  by  Chapter  469 
of  the  Acts  of  1896,  which  are  indicated  in  the  text  by  being  enclosed  in 
brackets.  In 'addition,  a  new  Special  Act  was  passed  by  the  Legislature  of 
1896,  applying  only  to  Caucuses  in  the  city  of  Boston.  (Chapter  435  of  the 
Acts  of  1896.)] 

[CHAP.  489.] 

AN  ACT   RELATIVE  TO   POLITICAL  COMMITTEES   AND   CAUCUSES. 

Be  it  enacted,  etc.,  as  follows: 

SECTION  i.  This  act  shall  be  known  and  may  be  cited  as  the  caucus 
act  of  eighteen  hundred  and  ninety-five. 

SECTION  2.  Terms  used  in  this  act  relating  to  caucuses  shall  have 
application  as  hereinafter  set  forth,  unless  other  meaning  is  clearly 
apparent  from  the  language  or  context,  or  from  manifest  intent. 

The  term  "  political  party,"  shall  apply  to  a  political  party  which  at 
the  preceding  annual  state  election  polled  for  governor  at  least  three 
per  cent,  of  the  entire  vote  cast  in  the  state  for  that  office. 

The  term  "  elective  office,"  shall  apply  to  candidates  for  any  office  to 
be  voted  for  at  a  state  or  municipal  election.  The  term  "  caucus 
officers,"  shall  apply  to  wardens,  clerks,  inspectors,  chairmen,  secre- 
taries and  tellers,  and  when  on  duty,  to  additional  officers  specially 
elected,  or  elected  to  fill  a  vacancy  and  taking  part  in  the  conduct  of 
caucuses. 

The  terms  "caucus,"  and  "political  convention,"  shall  apply  only  to 
such  as  shall  be  called  and  held  in  pursuance  of  this  act. 

The  term  "  political  committee,"  shall  apply  only  to  such  as  shall  be 
elected  in  pursuance  of  this  act. 

SECTION  3.  Each  political  party  shall  annually  elect  a  state  commit- 
tee who  shall  hold  office  for  one  year  from  the  first  day  of  January  next 
following  their  election  and  until  their  successors  shall  have  organized  ; 
said  committee  to  consist  of  at  least  one  member  from  each  senatorial 
district,  to  be  elected  at  the  convention  held  for  the  nomination  of  a 
senator  from  said  district  to  be  voted  for  at  the  annual  state  election. 

The  members  of  the  state  committee  shall,  within  thirty  days  from 
the  beginning  of  their  term  of  office,  meet  and  organize  by  the  choice 
of  a  chairman,  a  secretary  and  a  treasurer,  and  such  other  officers  as 
they  may  decide  to  elect. 


APPENDIX  G.  259 

The  secretary  of  the  state  committee  shall,  within  ten  days  of  such 
organization,  file  with  the  secretary  of  the  Commonwealth,  and  send  to 
each  city  and  town  committee,  a  list  of  the  members  of  the  committee 
and  of  the  officers  hereinbefore  named. 

Any  vacancy  occurring  in  the  office  of  chairman,  secretary  or  treas- 
urer in  the  committee  shall  be  filled  by  the  action  of  the  committee, 
and  a  statement  of  any  change  so  occurring  shall,  by  the  secretary,  be 
filed  as  in  the  case  of  the  officers  first  chosen. 

SECTION  4.  Each  political  party  shall  in  every  ward  and  town  annu- 
ally elect  a  committee  to  be  called  in  the  case  of  a  town  a  town  com- 
mittee, and  in  the  case  of  a  ward  a  ward  committee,  which  shall  consist 
of  not  less  than  three  persons,  who  shall  hold  office  for  one  year  from 
the  first  day  of  January  next  following  their  election  and  until  their 
successors  shall  have  organized,  except  that  whenever  a  ward  committee 
shall  be  elected  between  the  first  day  of  January  and  the  first  day  of 
June,  the  members  thereof  shall  hold  office  for  one  year  from  the  first 
day  of  June  next  following  their  election  [and  until  their  successors 
shall  have  organized]. 

The  members  of  the  several  ward  committees  of  a  political  party  in  a 
city  shall  constitute  a  committee  to  be  called  a  city  committee.  Each 
town  committee  shall  annually,  on  a  date  between  the  first  day  of  Jan- 
uary and  the  first  day  of  March  following,  and  each  city  committee 
shall,  within  thirty  days  from  the  beginning  of  their  term  of  office,  meet 
and  organize  by  the  choice  of  a  chairman,  a  secretary  and  a  treasurer, 
and  such  other  officers  as  they  may  decide  to  elect. 

SECTION  5.  The  secretary  of  each  city  and  town  committee  shall, 
within  ten  days  after  such  organization,  file  with  the  secretary  of  the 
Commonwealth,  with  the  clerk  of  the  city  or  town,  and  with  the  secre- 
tary of  the  state  committee  of  the  political  party  of  which  they  are  a 
portion,  a  list  of  the  members  of  the  committee  and  of  the  officers 
hereinbefore  named. 

Any  vacancy  occurring  in  the  office  of  chairman,  secretary  or  treas- 
urer in  a  committee  shall  be  filled  by  the  action  of  the  committee,  and 
a  statement  of  any  change  so  occurring  shall  be  filed  by  the  secretary 
as  in  the  case  of  the  officers  first  chosen. 

SECTION  6.  Any  state,  city  or  town  committee  may  make  such  rules 
and  regulations  for  its  conduct  as  are  not  inconsistent  with  the  provisions 
of  law.  And  any  state,  city  or  town  committee  authorized  by  this  act 
to  call  caucuses  for  the  choice  of  delegates  to  political  conventions  may 
make  rules  and  regulations  relative  to  such  caucuses,  not  inconsistent 
with  the  provisions  of  law. 

Committees  existing  at  the  time  this  act  takes  effect  shall  be  deemed 
to  be  organized  under  its  provisions. 

SECTION  7.  All  notices  for  holding  caucuses  shall  apply  to  all  mem- 
bers of  the  political  party  whose  caucuses  are  to  be  held,  and  to  them 
only.  No  person  having  voted  in  the  caucus  of  one  political  party 
shall  be  entitled  to  vote  or  take  part  in  the  caucus  of  another  political 


26o  APPENDICES. 

party  in  the  same  calendar  year.  Each  town  or  city  committee  may 
make  reasonable  regulations,  not  inconsistent  with  the  provisions  of  law, 
to  determine  membership  in  the  party,  and  to  restrain  others  than  those 
who  are  entitled  to  vote  at  the  caucus  from  attendance  thereat  or  taking 
part  therein.  But  no  political  committee  of  any  party  shall  deprive  any 
voter  from  taking  part  in  a  caucus  of  said  party  on  the  ground  that  the 
voter  had  supported  an  independent  candidate  for  political  office. 

SECTION  8.  All  caucuses  (except  for  special  elections)  for  choice  of 
delegates  to  political  conventions  which  nominate  candidates  to  be  voted 
for  at  the  annual  state  election,  and  for  the  nomination  of  candidates  to 
be  voted  for  at  the  annual  state  election,  shall  be  held  throughout  the 
Commonwealth  on  one  of  two  consecutive  days,  designated  by  the  state 
committee  of  the  political  party  for  which  said  caucuses  are  held  ;  and 
all  of  said  delegates  shall  be  elected  and  all  of  said  candidates  shall  be 
nominated  at  one  caucus,  except  that  caucuses  held  for  choice  of  dele- 
gates to  a  representative  district  convention,  or  for  nomination  of  candi- 
dates for  the  general  court,  may  be  called  and  held  as  hereinafter 
provided.  The  chairman  and  secretary  of  the  state  committee  of  each 
political  party  shall  at  least  twenty-one  days  before  the  date  on  which 
the  caucuses  are  to  be  held  forward  their  designations  of  dates  to  the 
chairman  and  secretary  of  each  city  and  town  committee  of  their  party, 
and  they  shall  at  the  same  time  designate  two  other  consecutive  days, 
which  shall  be  at  least  seven  days  later  than  the  designation  above- 
provided,  as  dates  on  which  caucuses  may  be  held  for  choice  of  dele- 
gates to  a  representative  district  convention,  or  for  nomination  of 
candidates  for  the  general  court.  If  at  least  twelve  days  prior  to  the 
earlier  date  any  representative  district  committee  shall  notify  the  chair- 
man and  secretary  of  each  town  and  ward  committee  of  their  party  in 
said  district  to  hold  the  caucus  for  choice  of  delegates  to  said  represen- 
tative district  convention  or  for  the  nomination  of  candidates  for  the 
general  court  on  one  of  said  latter  dates  such  caucus  shall  be  so  held. 

SECTION  9.  No  two  political  parties  shall  hold  their  caucuses  on  the 
same  day.  The  party  first  filing  with  the  secretary  of  the  Common- 
wealth the  copy  of  the  call  as  above-provided  shall  be  entitled  to  prece- 
dence on  the  days  named. 

SECTION  10.  Every  caucus  of  a  political  party  in  a  town  or  city  shall 
be  called  by  a  written  or  printed  notice  specifying  that  the  same  is  to 
be  held  in  accordance  with  the  provisions  of  the  caucus  act  of  eighteen 
hundred  and  ninety-five,  and  the  provisions  thereof  shall  then  apply  to 
the  conduct  and  proceedings  of  any  such  caucus,  but  nothing  herein 
shall  prevent  the  enforcement  at  such  caucus  of  further  regulations  not 
inconsistent  with  the  provisions  of  this  act.  Except  as  above- provided, 
no  caucus  or  meeting  [of  a  political  party]  shall  be  entitled  to  nomi- 
nate a  candidate  for  a  public  office,  whose  name  shall  be  placed  on 
the  ballots  provided  in  accordance  with  the  provisions  of  chapter  four 
hundred  and  seventeen  of  the  acts  of  the  year  eighteen  hundred  and 
ninety-three  and  acts  in  amendment  thereof  and  in  addition  thereto,  or 


APPENDIX  G.  261 

shall  be  entitled  to  select  delegates  to  a  political  convention  for  the 
nomination  of  a  candidate,  whose  name  shall  be  placed  on  the  ballots 
so  provided. 

SECTION  n.  At  least  two  weeks  prior  to  the  date  on  which  a  caucus 
is  to  be  held  the  chairman  or  secretary  of  the  city  or  town  committee 
shall  notify  the  board  of  aldermen  in  a  city  or  the  selectmen  in  a  town 
of  the  date  selected  for  said  caucus,  and  said  aldermen  or  selectmen 
shall,  at  the  expense  of  the  city  or  town,  provide  polling  places  for  said 
caucuses,  and  in  case  of  a  city,  not  less  than  one  for  each  ward ;  and 
said  aldermen  or  selectmen  shall,  at  least  ten  days  prior  to  the  date 
of  said  caucus,  notify  said  chairman  or  secretary  as  to  the  place  so 
provided. 

SECTION  12.  Notices  of  caucuses  held  under  the  provisions  of  this 
act  shall  be  issued  by  each  city  and  town  committee  not  less  than  seven 
days  prior  to  the  day  on  which  the  caucuses  are  to  be  held.  They 
shall  state  the  place  where,  and  the  day  and  hour  when,  the  several 
caucuses  are  to  be  held.  Said  notices  shall  be  conspicuously  placed  or 
posted  in  at  least  five  places  on  a  line  or  lines  of  public  travel,  and,  if 
practicable,  in  every  post-office  within  the  city  or  town  wherein  the 
caucus  is  to  be  held,  or  shall  be  published  at  least  twice  in  one  or  more 
local  newspapers,  if  any.  The  hour  for  calling  the  caucus  shall  not  be 
later  than  eight  o'clock  in  the  evening. 

The  notice  for  such  caucus  shall  designate  by  name  or  office  the  per- 
son who  shall  call  such  caucus  to  order ;  and  the  person  so  designated 
shall  call  the  caucus  to  order  and  preside  until  a  chairman  is  chosen. 
In  case  however  the  person  so  designated  is  absent  at  the  time  appointed 
any  member  of  the  ward  or  town  committee  present  shall  call  the 
caucus  to  order,  and  preside  until  a  chairman  is  chosen. 

The  organization  of  the  caucus  by  the  choice  of  a  chairman,  secre- 
tary, and  such  other  officers  as  the  meeting  may  require,  shall  be  the 
first  business  in  order. 

Any  business  that  may  properly  come  before  the  meeting  shall  next 
be  transacted. 

SECTION  13.  A  ballot  shall  be  taken  for  the  choice  of  any  candidate, 
delegate  or  member  of  a  political  committee,  to  be  selected  by  such 
caucus,  and  the  polls  shall  be  kept  open  at  least  thirty  minutes. 

In  balloting  the  voting  lists  last  published  according  to  law,  with  such 
subsequent  additions  thereto  as  may  be  certified  by  the  registrars  of 
voters,  shall  be  used  as  check  lists. 

The  registrars  of  voters  in  a  city  or  town,  whenever  a  caucus  is  called 
therein  in  accordance  with  the  provisions  of  this  act,  shall,  on  request 
of  the  person  designated  in  the  notice  thereof  to  call  the  caucus  to 
order,  furnish  him  for  use  in  the  caucus  a  certified  copy  of  the  voting 
lists  of  the  town,  or  of  the  ward  of  the  city,  for  which  the  caucus  is  to 
be  held,  as  last  published  according  to  law,  together  with  such  names 
of  voters  as  have  been  added  thereto  since  such  publication. 

No  person  shall  be  entitled  to  vote  or  to  take  part  in  such  caucus 
whose  name  does  not  appear  upon  said  list. 


262  APPENDICES. 

SECTION  14.  The  person  or  persons  receiving  the  highest  number  of 
votes  in  a  caucus  shall  be  deemed  and  declared  to  be  elected  or  nom- 
inated. In  case  of  a  tie  vote  for  delegates  to  a  convention,  or  in  case 
of  a  place  being  unfilled  in  a  delegation,  or  in  case  of  a  vacancy 
occasioned  by  inability  or  neglect  of  a  delegate  elected  to  attend  a 
convention,  such  vacancies  shall  be  filled  only  by  vote  of  the  remaining 
members  of  the  delegation  at  a  meeting  duly  called  for  the  purpose. 
Such  meeting  shall  choose  a  chairman  and  secretary,  and  the  secretary 
shall  notify  the  secretary  of  the  convention  of  the  action  of  the  meeting 
so  far  as  it  relates  to  a  vacancy. 

In  case  of  a  tie  vote  for  members  of  a  town  or  ward  committee,  or 
for  caucus  officers,  the  members  duly  elected  shall  fill  the  vacancy  or 
vacancies. 

In  case  a  majority  of  a  delegation,  or  ward  or  town  committee  or 
caucus  officers  are  not  elected,  or  in  case  of  a  tie  vote  for  candidates 
for  an  elective  office,  the  caucus  shall  at  once  proceed  to  another 
ballot,  unless  some  one  present  entitled  to  vote  objects ;  in  case  objec- 
tion is  made  the  caucus  shall  adjourn  until  the  following  or  other  subse- 
quent day.  The  hour  and  place  shall,  if  practicable,  be  the  same  as 
that  named  in  the  original  call. 

SECTION  15.  The  presiding  officer  and  secretary  of  each  caucus  shall 
within  five  week  days  thereafter  deliver,  send  or  cause  to  be  sent  to 
each  delegate  to  a  political  convention  and  to  each  member  of  a  politi- 
cal committee,  a  certificate  of  his  election,  and  to  each  candidate  for  an 
elective  office  a  notice  of  his  nomination. 

The  secretary  of  each  caucus  shall  safely  keep  all  ballots  cast  thereat 
and  all  voting  lists  used  therein  for  the  period  of  five  days.  If  before 
the  expiration  of  said  time  he  shall  be  requested  in  writing  by  ten  voters 
entitled  to  vote  in  said  caucus,  he  shall  safely  keep  said  ballots  and 
voting  list  for  the  period  of  three  months  thereafter,  and  shall  produce 
the  same  if  called  for  by  any  court  of  justice. 

If  within  three  week  days  of  any  caucus  a  person  who  has  received 
votes  thereat  for  nomination  or  election  to  any  office,  delegation  or 
political  committee  shall  serve  upon  the  secretary  of  said  caucus  a  state- 
ment in  writing  claiming  an  election  or  nomination,  or  shall  declare  in 
said  statement  an  intention  to  contest  the  nomination  or  election  of  any 
other  person,  such  secretary  shall  retain  every  envelope  containing  the 
ballots  for  such  nomination  or  office  until  such  claim  is  withdrawn  or 
the  contest  for  the  nomination  or  election  is  finally  determined  by 
competent  authority. 

The  secretary  of  a  caucus  receiving  the  above  notice  shall  immediately 
give  notice  in  writing  to  the  person  or  persons  interested,  and  the  chair- 
man and  secretary  who  served  at  the  caucus  at  which  the  ballots  were 
cast,  shall,  within  twenty-four  hours  after  the  giving  of  said  notice,  pro- 
ceed to  recount  said  ballots  and  determine  the  questions  raised,  and 
such  recount  shall  stand  as  the  true  result  of  the  vote  cast  in  such 
caucus.  And  each  of  such  candidates  may  appear  and  be  present 


APPENDIX  G.  263 

during  such  recount,  either  in  person  or  by  an  agent  appointed  by  him 
in  writing. 

SECTION  16.  Caucuses  relative  to  a  special  election  shall  be  held  at 
such  time  and  place  and  subject  to  such  reasonable  notice  as  the  politi- 
cal committee  whose  duty  it  is  to  provide  for  holding  the  same  may 
determine.  All  calls  for  the  same  shall  be  issued  by  the  chairman  and 
secretary  of  said  political  committee. 

SECTION  1 7.  The  penalties  imposed  by  law  upon  officers  and  voters 
who  violate  the  provisions  of  acts  regulating  state  elections  are 
hereby  imposed  upon  officers  and  voters  who  violate  the  provisions  of 
this  act. 

The  supreme  judicial  court  and  the  superior  court  shall  have  full 
power  at  law  or  in  equity  to  enforce  the  provisions  of  this  act. 

SECTION  18.  All  acts  or  parts  of  acts  inconsistent  herewith  are  hereby 
repealed.  \Approved  June  5,  1895.] 

[CHAP.  507.] 
AN  ACT  RELATIVE  TO  THE  HOLDING  OF  CAUCUSES  IN  CERTAIN  CITIES  AND 

TOWNS. 

Be  it  enacted,  etc.,  as  follows: 

SECTION  i.  Terms  used  in  this  act  relating  to  caucuses  shall  have 
application  as  hereinafter  set  forth,  unless  other  meaning  is  clearly 
apparent  from  the  language  or  context,  or  from  manifest  intent. 

The  term  "political  party,"  shall  apply  to  a  political  party  which  at 
the  preceding  annual  state  election  polled  for  governor  at  least  three 
per  cent,  of  the  entire  vote  cast  in  the  state  for  that  office. 

The  term  "  nomination  papers,"  shall  apply  only  to  those  used  in 
connection  with  caucuses,  as  herein  provided. 

The  term  "caucus  officers,"  shall  apply  to  wardens,  clerks  and 
inspectors,  and  when  on  duty  to  additional  officers  specially  elected,  or 
elected  to  fill  a  vacancy  and  taking  part  in  the  conduct  of  caucuses. 

The  term  "  elective  office,"  shall  apply  to  candidates  for  any  office  to 
be  voted  for  at  a  state  or  municipal  election. 

SECTION  2.  All  caucuses  of  a  political  party  in  the  city  of  Boston  and 
in  any  city  or  town  wherein  a  political  party,  prior  to  the  passage  of 
this  act,  accepted  the  provisions  of  chapter  five  hundred  and  four  of  the 
acts  of  the  year  eighteen  hundred  and  ninety-four,  for  the  choice  of 
candidates  to  be  voted  for  at  a  state  election,  for  the  choice  of  dele- 
gates to  a  political  convention  to  nominate  candidates  to  be  voted  for 
at  a  state  election,  for  the  choice  of  caucus  officers,  and  for  the  choice 
of  a  political  committee,  shall  be  called  and  held  as  herein  provided. 

All  caucuses  held  under  the  provisions  of  this  act,  except  those  that 
relate  to  a  municipal  or  special  election,  shall  be  held  at  the  call  of  the 
state  committee  of  the  political  party  whose  caucuses  are  to  be  held, 
and  the  chairman  and  secretary  of  said  state  committee  shall,  at  least 
twenty-one  days  before  the  date  on  which  the  caucuses  are  to  be  held, 


264  APPENDICES. 

forward  a  copy  of  the  call  to  the  chairman  and  secretary  of  each  city 
and  town  committee  of  the  party. 

SECTION  3.  All  caucuses  of  a  political  party  in  said  cities  and  towns 
for  the  choice  of  candidates  to  be  voted  for  at  a  city  or  town  election, 
and  for  the  choice  of  delegates  to  a  convention  to  nominate  candidates 
to  be  voted  for  at  a  city  or  town  election  [shall  be  called  and  held  as 
herein  provided  and]  shall  be  held  on  the  same  day  in  each  city  and 
town,  except  such  caucuses  as  relate  to  a  special  election  :  provided, 
however,  that  in  said  cities  or  towns  caucuses  for  the  choice  of  dele- 
gates to  a  convention  to  nominate  candidates  to  be  voted  for  by  the 
city  or  town  at  large  may  be  held  upon  a  different  day  from  the  other 
caucuses  above-mentioned.  All  caucuses  for  the  choice  of  a  ward  com- 
mittee shall  be  held  on  the  same  day,  which  may  be  the  same  as  the 
day  for  holding  caucuses  for  the  choice  of  candidates  to  be  voted  for  at 
a  city  election.  The  city  or  town  committee  shall  determine  the  days 
upon  which  all  the  caucuses  mentioned  in  this  section  shall  be  held, 
and  all  calls  for  the  same  shall  be  issued  by  the  chairman  and  secretary 
of  the  city  or  town  committee. 

No  two  political  parties  shall  hold  their  caucuses  on  the  same  day. 
The  party  first  filing  with  the  city  or  town  clerk,  [or  in  the  city  of  Bos- 
ton the  board  of  election  commissioners,]  a  copy  of  the  call  for  a  caucus 
shall  be  entitled  to  precedence  on  the  day  named. 

SECTION  4.  Notices  of  caucuses  in  said  cities  or  towns,  whether  held 
at  the  call  of  the  state  committee  or  at  the  call  of  the  city  or  town  com- 
mittee, shall  be  issued  not  less  than  eighteen  days  prior  to  the  day  on 
which  the  caucuses  are  to  be  held.  They  shall  state  the  day  when  the 
several  caucuses  shall  be  held  and  the  place  at  which  nomination 
papers,  as  hereinafter  provided,  shall  be  filed,  and  the  day  and  hour 
prior  to  which  said  nomination  papers  shall  be  filed. 

SECTION  5.  At  least  seven  days  prior  to  the  day  named  for  a  caucus, 
as  hereinbefore  provided,  the  city  or  town  committee  shall  issue  a  notice 
that  such  caucus  will  be  held,  stating  the  place,  the  day  and  the  hour  of 
holding  the  same.  The  hour  shall  not  be  earlier  than  two  o'clock  in  the 
afternoon,  nor  later  than  half-past  seven  o'clock  in  the  evening,  as  the 
city  or  town  committee  shall  determine. 

At  least  two  weeks  prior  to  the  date  on  which  a  caucus  is  to  be  held 
the  chairman  or  secretary  of  the  city  or  town  committee  shall  notify  the 
board  of  aldermen  in  a  city  or  the  selectmen  in  a  town  of  such  date, 
and  the  said  aldermen  or  selectmen  shall,  at  least  ten  days  prior  to  the 
date  on  which  the  caucus  is  to  be  held,  notify  the  city  or  town  commit- 
tee of  the  places  selected  for  holding  the  caucuses ;  and  said  aldermen 
or  selectmen  shall,  at  the  expense  of  the  city  or  town,  provide  polling 
places,  and  in  case  of  a  city,  not  less  than  one  for  each  ward,  and 
shall  prepare  the  same  with  booths,  registering  ballot  boxes,  guard  rails 
and  the  like,  in  the  same  manner  in  which  they  are  arranged  for  state 
elections. 

All  notices  for  caucuses  in  such  cities  or  towns  and  all  notices  relative 


APPENDIX  G. 


265 


to  the  filing  of  nomination  papers  shall  be  published  not  less  than  twice 
in  one  or  more  local  newspapers  if  there  are  any  such  newspapers  in 
such  cities  or  towns. 

SECTION  6.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  city  or  town  to  provide,  and  of 
the  city  or  town  clerk  seasonably  to  prepare,  for  each  political  party,  as 
herein  provided,  blank  nomination  papers  for  use  in  the  different  wards 
of  the  city  or  in  the  town,  stating  the  place  where,  and  the  day  and 
hour  prior  to  which,  signed  nomination  papers  must  be  filed.  On  the 
back  of  such  papers  shall  be  printed  sections  seven  to  fourteen  inclusive 
of  this  act.  Such  papers  shall,  by  the  city  or  town  clerk,  be  delivered 
to  the  chairman  or  secretary  of  the  political  committtee  for  whose  use 
they  have  been  prepared,  and  to  such  chairman  or  secretary  only. 

SECTION  7.  Nominations  by  members  of  a  political  party  of  candi- 
dates for  elective  offices,  for  delegates  to  a  convention,  for  caucus 
officers,  and  for  a  ward  or  town  committee  to  be  voted  for  at  a  caucus, 
shall  be  made  by  nomination  papers,  as  hereinafter  provided. 

Such  papers  shall  contain  the  signatures  of  not  less  than  five  legal 
voters  of  the  ward  or  town  in  which  the  caucus  is  to  be  held. 

Said  voters  shall  be  members  of  the  political  party  whose  caucus  is  to 
be  held. 

Every  voter  signing  a  nomination  paper  shall  sign  the  same  in  per- 
son, and  shall  add  to  his  signature  the  street  and  number,  if  any,  of  his 
residence. 

Nomination  papers  placing  candidates  in  nomination  shall  not  con- 
tain a  larger  number  of  names  of  candidates  than  there  are  persons  to 
be  elected.  They  may  contain  a  less  number.  [No  nomination  paper 
offered  for  filing  shall  be  received  or  deemed  to  be  valid  unless  there 
shall  be  presented  for  filing  with  such  nomination  paper  the  written 
acceptance  of  the  candidate  or  candidates  for  an  elective  office  thereby 
nominated.] 

SECTION  8.  In  addition  to  the  name  of  the  candidate  for  an  elective 
office  there  shall  be  given  the  street  and  number,  if  any,  of  his  resi- 
dence, and  there  may  be  given  his  business  or  occupation,  the  public 
offices  he  has  held,  or  any  other  information  whereby  his  identity  may 
be  established,  and  his  qualifications  for  the  office  to  be  filled,  or  his 
position  on  any  public  measure,  indicated.  Any  statement  of  this  nature 
shall  be  embodied  in  not  exceeding  eight  words. 

Against  the  name  of  a  candidate  for  caucus  officer  or  for  ward  or 
town  committee  shall  be  given  the  street  and  number,  if  any,  of  his 
residence. 

In  connection  with  names  of  persons  proposed  as  delegates  to  a  con- 
vention, any  such  statement  may  be  made  as  that  the  persons  named 
are  favorable  to,  or  are  pledged  to  support,  or  to  oppose,  any  person  or 
persons  for  an  office  or  offices  to  be  filled,  or  are  favorable  to,  or 
opposed  to,  any  public  measure,  or  are  uncommitted ;  such  statements 
shall  be  embodied  in  not  exceeding  eight  words. 

SECTION  9.   The  chairman  or  secretary  of  the  city  or  town  committee 


266  APPENDICES. 

shall  endorse  upon  the  nomination  papers  the  time  at  which  they  are 
filed  with  him. 

All  nomination  papers  shall  be  sealed  up  and  filed  in  the  office  of  the 
secretary  of  the  city  or  town  committee  not  less  than  ten  days  previous 
to  the  day  on  which  the  caucus  is  to  be  held  for  which  the  nominations 
are  made.  They  shall  not  be  opened  until  the  time  fixed  for  their 
announcement. 

SECTION  10.  At  the  expiration  of  the  time  named  at  which  nomina- 
tion papers  are  to  be  filed,  the  secretary  of  the  city  or  town  committee 
at  his  office  shall  cause  such  papers  to  be  publicly  opened,  and  the 
nominations  therein  made  to  be  publicly  announced. 

SECTION  1 1 .  In  case  of  any  error,  irregularity  or  informality  in  a 
nomination  paper  which  has  been  duly  filed  with  the  secretary  of  the 
city  or  town  committee,  he  may  make  or  cause  to  be  made  any  changes 
necessary  to  bring  it  within  the  requirements  hereinbefore  mentioned. 
In  default  of  such  action  he  shall  immediately  notify  the  person  filing 
the  nomination  paper,  of  such  error,  irregularity  or  informality,  and  the 
said  voter  may,  within  two  week  days  of  the  time  at  which  public 
announcement  was  made  of  the  contents  of  nomination  papers,  make 
or  cause  to  be  made  the  change  necessary  to  correct  such  error,  irregu- 
larity or  informality. 

SECTION  12.  In  a  city,  in  case  of  the  non-receipt,  as  herein  specified, 
of  nomination  papers  placing  persons  in  nomination  for  all  the  positions 
to  be  filled  at  the  ensuing  caucus,  in  accordance  with  the  provisions 
hereinbefore  given,  the  secretary  of  the  city  committee  shall  forthwith 
notify  the  chairman  or  secretary  of  the  committee  of  any  ward  from 
which  the  requisite  papers  have  not  been  filed.  They  or  one  of  them 
shall  forthwith  call  a  meeting  of  the  said  committee,  who  may  nominate 
candidates  for  any  and  all  offices  for  which  nomination  papers  have  not 
been  filed,  and  in  case  they  make  a  nomination  they  shall  immediately 
thereafter  notify  the  secretary  of  the  city  committee  of  such  action 
by  filing  with  him  nomination  papers  similar  to  those  hereinbefore 
described,  signed  in  their  official  capacity,  by  all  the  members  of  the 
committee  who  assent  to  the  nominations  therein  made.  In  case  of  dis- 
agreement two  sets  of  such  nomination  papers  may  be  filed.  Said  paper 
shall  have  the  same  force  and  authority  as  those  containing  the  signa- 
tures of  five  voters  of  the  ward,  and  shall  be  considered  and  treated  the 
same  in  all  respects.  If  at  the  expiration  of  two  week  days  after  the 
time  at  which  nomination  papers  were  opened  proper  nomination 
papers  have  not  been  filed  for  all  the  positions  to  be  filled,  or  in  case  of 
any  vacancy  caused  by  death  or  otherwise,  except  withdrawals,  the 
chairman  and  secretary  of  the  city  committee  as  a  committee  may 
exercise  the  nominating  powers  herein  vested  in  a  ward  committee, 
and  nomination  papers  filed  by  them  shall  have  the  same  force  and 
authority  as  other  nomination  papers. 

SECTION  13.  In  a  town,  in  case  of  the  non-receipt,  as  herein  speci- 
fied, of  nomination  papers  placing  persons  in  nomination  for  all  the 


APPENDIX  G.  267 

positions  to  be  filled  at  the  ensuing  caucus,  in  accordance  with  the  pro- 
visions hereinbefore  given,  or  in  case  of  a  vacancy  caused  by  death  or 
otherwise,  except  a  withdrawal,  the  chairman  or  secretary  of  the  town 
committee  shall  forthwith  call  a  meeting  of  the  said  committee,  who 
shall  have  all  the  powers  relative  to  the  nomination  of  candidates  here- 
inbefore conferred  upon  a  ward  committee,  a  city  committee,  and  the 
chairman  and  secretary  of  a  city  committee. 

SECTION  14.  If  any  person  whose  name  has  been  presented  on  a  nom- 
ination paper  shall,  within  two  week  days  of  the  published  announce- 
ment thereof,  file  with  the  secretary  of  the  city  or  town  committee  a 
written  request  for  the  withdrawal  of  his  name,  such  request  shall  be 
complied  with  and  the  secretary  of  the  city  or  town  committee  shall 
immediately  notify  the  person  filing  the  nomination  paper  of  such  with- 
drawal and  the  provisions  of  this  section  relating  thereto ;  and  the  said 
person  may,  within  twenty-four  hours  after  the  time  at  which  said  notice 
was  sent  from  the  secretary's  office,  present  a  new  name  on  a  paper 
signed  by  himself.  Said  new  paper  shall  have  the  same  force  and 
authority  as  that  originally  presented.  In  case  of  the  non-receipt  of  a 
new  paper,  as  herein  specified,  the  chairman  and  secretary  of  the  city 
or  town  committee  may  fill  the  vacancy. 

SECTION  15.  Not  less  than  seven  week  days  prior  to  the  day  upon 
which  the  caucuses  are  to  be  held  the  secretary  of  each  city  or  town 
committee  shall  place  in  the  hands  of  the  city  or  town  clerk  the 
nomination  papers  filed  with  him  in  accordance  with  the  provisions  of 
this  act. 

All  nomination  papers  which  are  by  this  act  required  to  be  filed  with 
the  city  or  town  clerk  shall  be  filed  in  the  office  of  the  city  or  town 
clerk  before  five  o'clock  in  the  afternoon  of  the  last  day  fixed  by  this  act 
for  the  filing  thereof. 

SECTION  16.  The  city  or  town  shall  provide  and  the  city  or  town 
clerk  of  such  city  or  town  shall  prepare  ballots  to  be  used  in  caucuses, 
and  such  ballots  shall  be  in  accordance  with  the  provisions  of  this  act. 

No  other  ballots  shall  be  received  or  counted  in  a  caucus  in  said  city 
or  town  held  under  the  provisions  of  this  act. 

At  the  top  of  each  ballot  shall  be  printed  the  words  "  The  official 
ballot  of  (here  shall  follow  the  party  name  of  the  committee)."  On  the 
back  and  outside,  when  folded,  of  each  ballot  shall  be  printed  the  words 
"  Official  ballot  of  the  (here  shall  be  inserted  the  party  name)  city 
[or  town]  committee,"  followed  by  the  number  of  the  ward  or  the 
name  of  the  town  for  which  the  ballot  is  prepared,  the  date  of  the  cau- 
cus and  a  facsimile  of  the  signature  of  the  secretary  of  the  party  which 
has  caused  the  ballot  to  be  prepared.  The  chairman  and  secretary  of 
the  city  or  town  committee  may  determine  the  number  of  ballots  to  be 
furnished  each  ward  or  town,  not  to  exceed  one  for  each  registered 
voter  in  said  ward  or  town.  In  case  of  their  failure  to  do  so,  the  city 
or  town  clerk  shall  determine  the  number. 

SECTION  17.  Names  of  candidates  for  all  elective  offices  shall  be 
arranged  alphabetically  according  to  their  surnames. 


268  APPENDICES. 

Names  of  candidates  fur  caucus  officers,  for  ward  or  town  commit- 
tees and  for  delegates  to  conventions,  may  be  arranged  in  groups  in 
the  order  in  which  they  are  filed,  but  shall  be  arranged  alphabetically 
according  to  their  surnames  whenever  written  request  therefor  is  made 
to  the  secretary  of  the  city  or  town  committee,  by  any  ward  or  town 
committee,  or  whenever  the  city  or  town  committee  shall  vote  so  to  do. 

Against  the  name  of  a  candidate  for  a  caucus  officer  for  an  elective 
office  or  a  ward  or  town  committee  shall  be  printed  the  street  and  num- 
ber, if  any,  of  his  residence. 

Against  the  name  of  a  candidate  for  an  elective  office  or  a  political 
convention  shall  be  printed  the  statement  which  is  contained  in  the 
nomination  paper  placing  the  candidate  in  nomination. 

SECTION  18.  No  names  shall  be  printed  on  a  ballot  other  than  those 
which  have  been  duly  presented  on  nomination  papers. 

Immediately  following  the  names  of  candidates  blank  spaces  for  the 
insertion  in  writing  of  other  names  equal  to  the  number  of  persons  to  be 
chosen  shall  be  provided. 

Upon  the  ballot  shall  be  stated  the  number  of  persons  to  be  voted 
for  the  different  positions  to  be  filled! 

A  star  (*)  against  a  name  shall  indicate  that  a  person  is  a  candidate 
for  re-election. 

A  cross  (X)  marked  against  a  name  shall  constitute  a  vote  for  the 
person  so  designated ;  but  if  a  voter  marks  a  cross  against  more  names 
than  there  are  persons  to  be  elected  to  an  office,  his  vote  for  that  office 
shall  not  be  counted.  The  form  of  ballots  and  the  arrangement  of 
printed  matter  thereon  shall  be  in  general  that  observed  in  ballots  pro- 
vided by  the  state  at  elections,  except  as  herein  otherwise  provided. 

SECTION  19.  The  city  or  town  clerk  of  the  city  or  town  shall  on  the 
day  on  which  a  caucus  is  to  be  held,  before  the  opening  of  the  polls, 
deliver  at  the  polling  place  to  the  warden,  if  present,  or  if  not  present 
then  to  the  clerk,  if  both  warden  and  clerk  are  absent  then  to  any 
inspector  who  may  be  present,  the  sample  ballots,  together  with  the 
ballots  hereinbefore  provided  for  and  the  voting  lists  required  by  law  to 
be  used  in  caucuses.  The  city  or  town  clerk  shall  also  prepare  at  the 
expense  of  the  city  or  town  and  deliver  at  the  time  and  place  aforesaid 
suitable  blank  forms  and  apparatus  for  canvassing  and  counting  the 
ballots  and  making  the  returns  required  by  this  act,  a  seal  of  suitable 
device  for  each  polling  place,  and  a  record  book. 

It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  presiding  officer  at  each  polling  place,  at 
or  prior  to  the  hour  of  opening  the  caucus,  to  cause  to  be  conspicu- 
ously posted  or  placed  in  such  polling  place  not  less  than  six  facsimile 
copies  of  the  ballots  to  be  used  in  the  caucuses,  such  copies  to  be 
printed  on  tinted  paper.  They  shall  be  kept  so  posted  or  placed  dur- 
ing the  whole  time  that  balloting  is  in  progress. 

SECTION  20.   The  order  of  business  in  caucuses  shall  be  as  follows  : 

(i)  Any  necessary  preliminary  business  that  may  properly  come 
before  the  meeting  shall  first  be  transacted. 


APPENDIX  G.  269 

(2)  Thereafter  balloting  shall  be  allowed  to  proceed  uninterrup- 
tedly until  half  past  eight  o'clock  in  the  evening,  when  the  polls  shall 
be  closed  unless  the  caucus  shall  vote  to  keep  them  open  until  a  later 
hour. 

(3)  At  the  conclusion  of  the  balloting,  any  other  business  properly 
before  the  caucus  shall  be  in  order. 

SECTION  21.  If  at  any  caucus  held  under  the  provisions  of  this  act 
the  right  of  a  person  offering  to  vote  is  challenged  for  any  cause  recog- 
nized by  law,  the  presiding  officer  shall  require  the  name  and  residence 
of  the  person  so  offering  to  vote  to  be  written  by  himself,  or  by  some 
one  in  his  behalf,  on  the  outside  of  the  ballot  so  offered,  and  the  presid- 
ing officer  shall  add  thereto  the  name  of  the  person  so  challenging  and 
the  assigned  cause  for  which  the  challenge  is  made,  before  such  ballot 
is  received ;  but  nothing  in  this  section  shall  be  construed  as  permit- 
ting officers  in  the  caucus  to  receive  any  ballot  which  by  law  they  are 
required  to  refuse. 

No  officer,  otherwise  than  as  above-required  or  permitted,  and  no 
person  other  than  an  officer  of  the  caucus,  shall  make  any  statement  or 
give  any  information  in  regard  to  a  ballot  cast  by  a  voter  so  challenged 
at  any  such  caucus,  except  as  required  by  law. 

SECTION  22.  Immediately  after  the  polls  are  declared  closed,  but  not 
before,  the  ballots  shall  be  counted  in  full  view  of  the  voters.  When 
the  total  result  and  counting  of  ballots  has  been  ascertained  the  presid- 
ing officer  shall  make  public  announcement  thereof  in  open  meeting, 
and  shall,  in  open  meeting,  cause  the  clerk  of  the  caucus  to  enter  in 
words  at  length  in  the  record  book,  provided  for  his  use  by  the  city  or 
town  clerk,  the  total  number  of  names  checked  on  the  voting  list,  the 
total  number  of  ballots  cast,  the  names  of  all  persons  voted  for,  the 
number  of  votes  received  for  each  person,  and  the  title  of  the  delega- 
tion or  office  for  which  he  was  proposed.  Each  clerk  of  a  caucus  shall 
forthwith  make  a  copy  of  the  record  so  made  by  him,  certify  and  seal 
the  same,  and  transmit  the  same  with  the  record  book  to  the  city  or 
town  clerk,  as  hereinafter  provided.  The  clerk  shall  then,  in  the 
presence  of  those  who  are  responsible  for  the  count  and  before  the 
adjournment  of  the  caucus,  seal  up  all  ballots  which  have  been  cast, 
together  with  the  check  lists  used  in  the  caucus  and  a  statement  regard- 
ing any  challenge  which  has  been  made. 

The  warden  and  clerk  of  the  caucus  shall  indorse  upon  such  package 
the  name  of  the  political  party  holding  the  caucus,  for  what  delegations 
and  candidatures  and  in  what  ward  the  ballots  were  cast,  and  the  date 
of  the  caucus.  The  warden  shall  forthwith  transmit  to  the  city  or  town 
clerk,  by  the  police  officer  or  by  some  other  legal  officer  stationed  by 
said  clerk  in  attendance  at  the  caucus,  all  the  ballots  cast  and  the  voting 
lists,  the  copy  of  the  records,  sealed  as  aforesaid,  together  with  the 
record  book  of  the  clerk.  The  city  or  town  clerk  shall  safely  keep  such 
sealed  packages  for  not  less  than  three  months,  and  shall  produce  the 
same  if  called  for  by  any  court,  justice,  tribunal  or  convention  having 
jurisdiction  of  the  same. 


270 


APPENDICES. 


SECTION  23.  If,  within  the  twenty-four  hours  next  succeeding  the 
day  of  any  caucus  held  under  the  provisions  of  this  act,  ter.  or  more 
qualified  voters  of  any  ward  or  town  shall  file  with  the  city  or  town 
clerk  a  statement  that  they  have  reason  to  believe  that  the  records  and 
returns  made  by  the  caucus  officers  of  such  ward  or  town  are  erroneous, 
and  shall  specify  wherein  they  deem  them  in  error,  in  the  city  of  Boston 
the  city  clerk  shall  forthwith  transmit  such  statement  to  the  ballot  law 
commission  having  jurisdiction  in  the  premises,  and  in  other  cities  and 
towns  to  the  registrars  of  voters,  together  with  the  sealed  package  or 
packages  containing  all  the  ballots  cast  and  voting  lists  used  at  such 
caucus,  and  said  ballot  law  commission  or  registrars  of  voters,  as  the 
case  may  be,  shall  within  two  days  next  succeeding  the  day  of  such 
caucus  open  said  package  or  packages  and  recount  said  ballots  and 
determine  the  questions  raised,  and  such  recount  shall  stand  as  the 
true  result  of  the  vote  cast  in  such  caucus.  And  each  candidate  inter- 
ested may  appear  and  be  present  during  such  recount,  either  in  person 
or  by  an  agent  appointed  by  him  in  writing. 

SECTION  24.  In  any  city  or  town  after  the  passage  of  this  act  the 
city  or  town  committee  of  any  political  party  shall,  at  the  written 
request  of  fifty  voters,  members  of  said  party,  call  a  caucus  or  caucuses 
of  said  party  for  the  purpose  of  voting  upon  the  question  whether  the 
provisions  of  this  act  shall  be  adopted  by  said  political  party  in  said 
city  or  town.  The  notice  of  said  caucus  or  caucuses  shall  state  the 
day,  the  place  and  the  hour,  not  earlier  than  six  o'clock  in  the  evening 
and  not  later  than  half  past  seven  o'clock  in  the  evening,  of  holding 
said  caucus  or  caucuses,  and  shall  be  issued  at  least  seven  days  prior  to 
the  day  named  for  said  caucus  or  caucuses,  and  shall  be  published  not 
less  than  twice  in  one  or  more  local  newspapers,  if  there  are  any  such 
newspapers  in  such  cities  or  towns,  and  shall  be  posted  in  at  least  five 
public  places  in  each  ward  or  town.  The  sense  of  said  caucus  or  cau- 
cuses shall  be  taken  by  ballot  and  the  polls  shall  be  kept  open  at  least 
one  hour.  If  said  political  party  shall  by  a  majority  of  the  votes  cast  at 
said  caucus  or  caucuses  vote  to  adopt  the  provisions  of  this  act,  nomi- 
nation papers,  ballots  and  other  apparatus  required  for  caucuses  so  held, 
shall  be  provided  for  said  party  at  the  expense  of  the  city  or  town,  and 
all  caucuses  of  said  political  party  in  said  city  or  town  shall  thereafter 
be  conducted  according  to  the  provisions  of  this  act. 

SECTION  25.  A  political  party  of  a  city  or  town  which  has  so  accepted 
the  provisions  of  this  act  may,  however,  at  any  other  caucus  or  caucuses 
called  for  the  purpose,  upon  notices  given  as  aforesaid,  held  not  less 
than  one  year  after  the  date  of  the  caucus  or  caucuses  whereat  said 
acceptance  is  voted,  revoke  such  action  by  the  affirmative  vote  of  a 
majority  of  the  voters  entitled  to  vote  in  such  caucus  or  caucuses 
present  and  voting  by  ballot  thereon.  The  polls  at  said  caucus  or  cau- 
cuses shall  be  kept  open  at  least  one  hour.  Whenever  a  political  party 
in  a  city  or  town  shall  vote  to  accept  the  provisions  of  this  act  or  to 
revoke  such  acceptance,  the  secretary  of  the  city  or  town  committee  of 


APPENDIX  G. 


271 


such  political  party  shall,  within  ten  days  of  such  action,  file  with  the 
secretary  of  the  Commonwealth  and  with  the  clerk  of  the  city  or  town 
and  the  secretary  of  the  state  committee  of  the  political  party  so  voting 
a  notice  of  such  action. 

SECTION  26.  In  such  city  or  town  in  each  year  at  the  caucus  held  in 
a  ward  or  town  for  the  choice  of  delegates  to  the  state  convention  there 
shall  be  chosen  one  warden,  one  clerk  and  at  least  five  inspectors,  and 
such  additional  inspectors  in  wards  having  more  than  five  precincts  as 
the  city  committee  of  the  political  party  whose  caucuses  are  to  be  held 
may  each  year  determine.  They  shall  be  qualified  voters  of  the  ward 
or  town  in  which  they  are  elected  and  members  of  the  political  party 
whose  caucus  is  to  be  held.  Every  caucus  officer  so  elected  shall  hold 
office  for  the  term  of  one  year,  beginning  with  the  first  day  of  October 
succeeding  his  election  and  until  his  successor  is  elected. 

SECTION  27.  The  respective  duties  of  caucus  officers  shall  be  in  gen- 
eral the  same  as  those  required  of  election  officers  at  elections,  as  pro- 
vided in  chapter  four  hundred  and  seventeen  of  the  acts  of  the  year 
eighteen  hundred  and  ninety-three  and  all  acts  in  amendment  thereof. 
They  shall,  for  the  performance  of  their  respective  duties,  attend  in 
their  respective  wards  or  towns  at  the  times  and  places  duly  designated 
for  caucuses. 

SECTION  28.  If  at  any  caucus  a  majority  of  the  caucus  officers  shall 
so  vote,  additional  officers,  to  serve  in  that  caucus  only,  may  be  elected 
by  a  majority  vote  of  the  caucus  officers  present  and  voting  thereat,  and 
in  case  of  the  absence  of  any  caucus  officer  the  vacancy  thus  occurring 
shall  be  filled  in  the  same  manner. 

In  case  of  a  vacancy  in  the  number  of  caucus  officers  by  death, 
declination  of  election,  resignation,  removal  from  the  city  or  town,  or 
otherwise,  the  vacancy  shall  be  filled  by  a  majority  vote  of  all  the 
remaining  caucus  officers.  A  removal  from  the  ward  or  town  during  the 
year  for  which  an  officer  was  elected  shall  not  disqualify  him  from  serv- 
ing in  the  caucus  of  the  ward  or  town  wherein  he  was  elected. 

No  person  shall  be  eligible  to  the  position  of  warden  or  clerk  who  is 
a  member  of  a  ward  or  town  committee,  and  no  person  shall  serve  as  a 
caucus  officer  at  any  caucus  wherein  he  is  a  candidate  for  an  elective 
office  or  for  a  nomination  to  an  elective  office,  or  candidate  for  ward 
or  town  committee. 

SECTION  29.  A  city  or  town  committee  of  a  political  party  which  shall 
adopt  the  provisions  of  this  act  shall,  not  less  than  ten  days  prior  to 
holding  any  caucus  under  its  provisions,  appoint  such  caucus  officers  as 
are  hereinbefore  provided  for  in  each  ward  or  town  to  serve  at  the  first 
caucus  to  be  held  after  the  adoption  of  this  act. 

[SECTION  30.  In  the  case  of  a  newly  incorporated  city,  or  in  the  case 
of  re-division  into  wards  of  a  city  to  which  the  provisions  of  this  act 
apply,  at  the  first  caucuses  held  in  the  next  succeeding  year  the  caucus 
officers  to  serve  in  such  caucuses  shall  be  appointed  by  the  city  com- 
mittee ;  and  at  the  aforesaid  caucuses  the  regular  caucus  officers  shall 


272 


APPENDICES. 


be  chosen  as  hereinbefore  provided.  Each  officer  so  chosen  shall  hold 
office  for  one  year  from  the  first  day  of  October  succeeding  his  election 
and  until  his  successor  is  elected.  In  case  of  such  re-division  of  a  city 
into  wards  any  political  party  may  in  the  next  succeeding  year  elect  its 
ward  committees,  to  serve  for  such  terms,  not  exceeding  the  length  of 
the  terms  for  which  the  former  committees  were  chosen,  as  the  city 
committee  existing  at  the  time  of  calling  the  caucuses  may  determine, 
and  thereafter  shall  elect  such  committees  at  the  times  and  for  the 
terms  prescribed  by  law.] 

SECTION  31.  All  caucuses  held  under  the  provisions  of  this  act, 
except  as  is  herein  otherwise  provided,  shall  be  held  in  general  accord- 
ance with  the  provisions  relative  to  the  conduct  of  elections  and  the 
manner  of  voting  at  elections  contained  in  chapter  four  hundred  and 
seventeen  of  the  acts  of  the  year  eighteen  hundred  and  ninety-three 
and  acts  in  amendment  thereof. 

SECTION  32.  The  penalties  imposed  by  law  upon  officers  and  voters 
who  violate  the  provisions  of  acts  regulating  state  elections  are  hereby 
imposed  upon  officers  and  voters  who  violate  the  provisions  of  this  act. 
The  supreme  judicial  court  and  the  superior  court  shall  have  full  power 
at  law  or  in  equity  to  enforce  the  provisions  of  this  act. 

SECTION  33.  All  acts  or  parts  of  acts  inconsistent  herewith  are  hereby 
repealed.  {Approved June  5,  1895.] 


APPENDIX  H. 

APPENDIX   H. 
FORMS  USED   BY   CITIZENS'  ASSOCIATIONS. 


273 


I. 

The  Library  Hall  Association  of  Cambridge,  Mass.  Notification 
of  election  to  membership  with  accompanying  copy  of  the  By- Laws 
of  the  Association. 


Hftear?  l^all  association  of  Camfcritige* 

Treasurer.  President.  Secretary. 


CAMBRIDGE,  Novr.  21,  1892. 

Mr 

Dear  Sir : 

Your  name  having  been  proposed  for  mem- 
bership and  approved  by  the  Executive  Committee,  you  can 
become  a  member  of  this  Association  as  provided  in  Article  III. 
of  the  by-laws.  Please  sign  the  enclosed  card,  and  return  the 
same  with  amount  of  admission  fee  (one  dollar)  to  the  Secretary, 
86  Mt.  Auburn  Street.  A  copy  of  the  by-laws  is  herewith 
enclosed. 

Yours  respectfully, 


Secretary. 

TS 


274  APPENDICES. 


BY   LAWS. 

ARTICLE  I.     NAME. 

The  name  of  this  Association  shall  be  The  Library  Hall  Association 
of  Cambridge. 

ARTICLE  II.     OBJECT. 

The  purposes  of  this  Association  shall  be  to  secure  the  nomination 
and  election  of  proper  candidates  for  municipal  offices ;  to  procure  the 
punishment  of  all  persons  who  may  be  guilty  of  election  frauds,  malad- 
ministration of  office  or  misappropriation  of  public  funds ;  to  advocate 
and  promote  a  public  service  based  upon  character  and  capability  only  ; 
and  to  promote  intelligent  discussion  of  municipal  affairs  by  the  publica- 
tion and  distribution  of  reliable  information  in  relation  thereto. 

ARTICLE  III.     MEMBERSHIP. 

Any  citizen  of  Cambridge  shall  be  eligible  to  membership  without 
regard  to  his  political  preferences.  Proposals  for  membership  shall  be 
made  in  writing  to  the  Executive  Committee  in  such  form  as  they  may 
provide,  and  if  approved  by  three-fourths  of  that  Committee  the  appli- 
cant shall  become  a  member  upon  signing  these  By- Laws  and  payment 
of  the  admission  fee.  Proposals  not  approved  by  the  Executive  Com- 
mittee may  be  referred  by  any  member  to  the  Association,  which  may, 
by  a  three-fourths  vote  of  all  present  at  any  meeting,  elect  said  appli- 
cant. The  Executive  Committee  shall  investigate  charges  of  misconduct 
against  any  member  of  the  Association,  and  report  to  the  Association 
such  recommendations  as  they  may  deem  desirable  in  relation  to  the 
same.  The  Association  may  then,  by  three- fourths  vote  of  all  present 
expel  said  member,  provided  he  shall  be  notified  of  the  proposed  action 
and  be  heard  in  his  own  behalf,  if  he  so  desires.  Any  member  not  in 
arrears,  may  at  any  time  resign  his  membership  by  sending  a  written 
notice  to  the  Secretary. 

ARTICLE  IV.     OFFICERS. 

The  officers  of  the  Association  shall  be  a  President,  one  Vice-President 
from  each  Ward,  a  Treasurer,  a  Secretary,  three  Auditors  and  an  Execu- 
tive Committee  of  five  from  each  Ward  who  shall,  after  the  first  organ- 
ization, be  elected  at  the  annual  meeting  in  October,  and  hold  office 
until  their  successors  are  elected.  The  President,  Treasurer  and  Secre- 
tary shall  also  be  ex-officio  members  of  the  Executive  Committee.  No 
person  holding  any  salaried  position  under  the  National,  State,  or  City 
Government,  and  no  member  of  either  branch  of  the  City  Council  shall 
be  eligible  for  election  to  any  office  of  the  Association.  Any  officer  of 


APPENDIX  H. 


275 


the  Association  who  shall  become  a  candidate  for  any  of  the  above 
offices  shall  cease  to  hold  his  position  as  an  officer  of  this  Association, 
and  the  Executive  Committee  shall  immediately  choose  a  member  to 
fill  the  vacancy  for  the  remainder  of  the  term  of  said  officer.  The 
Executive  Committee  may  employ  such  assistance  as  they  may  deem 
necessary  in  the  prosecution  of  the  work  of  the  Association,  provided 
that  no  expense  shall  be  incurred  beyond  the  amount  of  money  in  the 
Treasury  not  appropriated  for  other  purposes.  The  Treasurer,  Secre- 
tary and  Executive  Committee,  shall,  at  the  October  meeting,  present  a 
report  of  their  work  for  the  preceding  year.  And  the  Treasurer  shall 
also,  at  the  December  meeting,  present  a  detailed  report  of  the  expen- 
ditures of  the  Association  in  the  last  preceding  municipal  campaign, 
which  shall  be  audited  and  printed  in  one  or  more  newspapers  pub- 
lished in  Cambridge. 

ARTICLE  V.     FEES. 

Every  member  shall  pay  to  the  Treasurer  the  sum  of  one  dollar  as  an 
admission  fee,  and  upon  the  first  day  of  October  in  each  year,  he  shall 
pay  an  annual  assessment  of  one  dollar.  Any  member  refusing  or  fail- 
ing to  pay  any  assessment  for  one  month  after  the  same  becomes 
payable  shall  thereby  lose  his  membership,  unless  the  Executive  Com- 
mittee shall  relieve  him  from  said  payment  by  a  two-thirds  vote. 

ARTICLE  VI.     MEETINGS. 

The  Association  shall  hold  meetings  on  the  last  Monday  in  October, 
December  and  March,  and  at  such  other  times  as  the  interests  of  the 
Association  may  require.  Special  meetings  of  the  Association  shall  be 
called  by  the  Secretary  by  order  of  the  Executive  Committee,  or  upon 
the  written  request  of  ten  members,  stating  the  reason  therefor.  The 
Secretary  shall  mail  to  each  member  a  printed  notice  of  the  time  and 
place  of  every  meeting,  stating  the  purpose  for  which  it  is  called.  At 
special  meetings  no  business  shall  be  transacted  except  that  specified  in 
the  notice  of  the  meeting.  At  any  meeting  of  the  Association  one- 
tenth  of  all  the  members  shall  constitute  a  quorum ;  ten  members  of 
the  Executive  Committee  shall  be  a  quorum  to  transact  all  business  ex- 
cept the  admission  of  members. 

ARTICLE  VII.     AMENDMENTS. 

These  By-Laws  may  be  amended  by  a  vote  of  two-thirds  of  those 
present  at  any  meeting  of  the  Association,  the  proposed  amendment 
having  been  printed  upon  the  notice  for  the  meeting  at  which  said 
vote  is  taken.  In  no  case  shall  these  By-Laws,  or  any  of  them,  be 
suspended. 


2;6  APPENDICES. 

II. 

The  Library  Hall  Association :  Postal  card  containing  notice  of 
the  annual  meeting  of  the  Association  for  the  purpose  of  endorsing 
candidates  for  the  municipal  election ;  and  also  the  admission  card 
sent  to  each  member  of  the  Association. 

£I)r  Library  t)all  association  of  Cambnogc. 

GEORGE   CLOSE,  RICHARD   H.   DANA,  GEORGE   G.   WRIGHT. 

Treasurer,  President.  Secretary, 

243  Broadway.  86  ML  Auburn  Street. 

CAMBRIDGE,  Nov.  27,  1893. 

In  accordance  with  a  vote  of  the  Executive  Committee,  the  members 
are  requested  to  meet  at 

THE  CITIZENS'  TRADE  ASSOCIATION  HALL,  604  MAIN  ST., 
MONDAY,  NOVEMBER  27,  AT  7.30  P.  M., 

to  consider  what  action  shall  be  taken  by  this  Association  in  regard  to 
the  municipal  election  in  December. 

As  this  is  not  a  public  meeting,  none  but  members  will  be  admitted 
to  the  Hall. 

TJie  BLUE  card,  mailed  Nov.  24,  must  be  presented  at 
the  door. 

The  hour  is  730  TO-NIGHT. 

GEORGE  G.  WRIGHT,  Secretary. 


[COPY   OF    BLUE    CARD.] 

422  1893. 

C&e  tfbrarp  Dall  association  of  Cambridge. 

GEORGE   CLOSE,  RICHARD   H.    DANA,  GEORGE   G.   WRIGHT, 

Treasurer,  President.  Secretary, 

243  Broadway.  86  Mt.  Auburn  Street. 

ADMIT  MR to 

The   Citizens'  Trade  Association  Hall,  604   Main  Street, 
Monday,  Nov.  27,  at  7.30  P.  M. 

GEORGE   G.  WRIGHT, 

Secretary. 
This  ticket  is  Not  Transferable,  and  will  admit  only  the  person  named  thereon. 


APPENDIX  H. 
III. 


277 


The  Library  Hall  Association  :  Sample  ballot  used  in  endorsing  can- 
didates for  the  Board  of  Aldermen,  at  the  meeting  held  in  Novem- 
ber, 1892. 


Cfje  Library  5>all  gssoctation  of  Cambridge. 


GEORGE   CLOSE, 
Treasurer. 


RICHARD   H.    DANA, 

President. 


GEORGE  G.   WRIGHT, 
Secretary. 


FOR   ALDERMEN.      Mark  for  Eleven. 

The  City  Charter  provides  that  the  Board  of  Aldermen  shall  consist  of  eleven  members, 
who  shall  be  chosen  by  the  qualified  voters  of  the  whole  city.  They  may  be  all  chosen 
from  one  ward. 


WARD    ONE. 

•RUSSELL  BRADFORD,  375  Harvard  St.,        Lawyer, 

*EDWARD  B.  JAMES,  88  Lakeview  Ave.,  Lumber  dealer, 

ANDREW  JACKSON  JONES,    52  Mt.  Auburn  St.,  Carriage  builder, 
•MARSHALL  N.  STEARNS,        44  Wallace  St.,        Mason, 


Temple  Hall. 
Democratic. 
Democratic. 
Temple  Hall. 


•LOUIS  F.  BALDWIN, 

WALWORTH  O.    BARBOUR, 
•WELLINGTON   FILLMORE, 

EDWARD  H.   NORTON, 
•ANDREW   J.    RADY, 
•PETER  F.   ROURKE, 


WARI>    TWO. 

196  Prospect  St.,        Manager, 


Nomination 

paper. 

8  Bigelow  St.          Machinist,  Democratic. 

155  Washington  St.,  Builder,  Temple  Hall. 

402  Winsor  St.,  Democratic. 

254  Broadway,  Druggists'  sundries,  Temple  Hall. 

197  Harvard  St.,        Grocer,  Temple  Hall. 


WARD    THREE. 


*  PETER  P.   BLEILER, 
*.IOHN   S.    CLARY, 

•JOHN  H.  PONCE, 
JOHN  J.   SCOTT, 


60  Spring  St., 
75  Otis  St., 


Cigar  manufac'r, 
Lumber, 


84  Thorndike  St.,     Lawyer, 
90  Spring  St.,  Student, 

WARD    FOUR. 


•CHARLES  W.   CHENEY.  351  Pearl  St.,  Salesman, 

fHARLES  W.   HENDERSON,  238  Pearl  St.,  Paper  stock, 

WILLIAM   F.   McCORMICK,        56  Austin  St.,  Grocer, 

<'HARLES   H.   MILLNER,  39  Western  Ave.,  Plumber, 

•JOHN   G.   THOROGOOD,  103  Allston  St.,  Foreman, 


WARD    FIVE. 


WILLIAM  A.  BOCK. 
MICHAEL  CORCORAN, 
WATSON   G.  CUTTER, 
•WALTER  H.   LERNED, 

•  Member  of  City  Council,  1893. 


347  North  Ave., 
44  Hudson  St., 
37  Linnaean  St., 

319  North  Ave., 


Florist, 
Printer, 
Real  estate, 
Dealer  in  butter, 


Temple  Hall. 
Nomination 

paper. 
Democratic, 
Temple  Hall. 
Democratic. 


Temple  Hall. 
Democratic. 
Democratic. 
Democratic. 
Temple  Hall. 


Democratic. 
Democratic. 
Temple  Hall. 
Temple  Hall. 


278  APPENDICES. 

IV. 

The  Library  Hall  Association  :  Sample  ballot  used  in  endorsing  a 
candidate  for  Mayor  at  the  meeting  held  November  27,  1893. 


Library  hall  Association  of  CainbnDgr. 


FOR     MAYOR. 

•WILLIAM  A.  BANCROFT,    6  Putnam  Avenue,    Lawyer,          Temple  HalL 
JOSEPH  J.  KELLEY,  1  10  Otis  Street,          Undertaker,    Democratic. 

•  Present  incumbent. 


V. 

The  Library  Hall  Association  :  Sample  ballot  used  in  endorsing  can- 
didates for  the  Common  Council,  used  at  the  meeting  held  Nov.  27, 
1893. 


Cljr  Library  Dall  association  of  CambriUge. 

GEORGE   CLOSE,  RICHARD   H.    DANA,  GEORGE   G.  WRIGHT, 

Treasurer.  President.  Secretary. 


FOR     COMMON     COUNCIL. 

WARD    TWO. -Mark  for  Five. 

FRANK  J.  CARNES,  70  Harvard  St.,  Boot  maker,  Democratic. 

•CHARLES  M.  CONANT,  22  Lee  St.,  Moulding  mill,  Temple  Hall. 

WILLIAM  R.   DAVIS,  174  Columbia  St.,  Cooper,  Temple  Hall. 

JAMES  A.   DONOVAN,  31  Tremont  St.,  Salesman.  Democratic. 

JOHN   A.   ELLIOTT,  Democratic. 

J.  WALTER  FARRELL,  73  Inman  St.,  Clerk,  Temple  Hall. 

FRANK  MCLAUGHLIN,  21  Washington  St.,  Rubber  cutter,  Democratic. 

JAMES  F.  MULLEN,  98  Norfolk  St.,  Undertaker,  Democratic. 

JOHN  L.  ODIORNE,  287  Harvard  St.,  Real  estate,  Temple  Hall. 

CHARLES  H.    II  I  IS,  60  Antrim  St.,  Milk  dealer,  Temple  Hall. 
•  Member  of  City  Council,  1893. 

NOTE.  —  The  designation  "democratic"  occurring  after  some  of  the  names  on 
the  above  ballots  would  seem  to  contradict  the  statement  in  the  text,  that  national 
party  lines  are  not  drawn  in  municipal  elections  in  Cambridge.  The  Democratic 
City  Committee,  however,  in  1893,  did  attempt  to  draw  party  lines  at  the  city 
election,  but  their  nominees  met  with  such  a  crushing  defeat  at  the  polls  that  the 
experiment  has  not  been  repeated. 


INDEX. 


ABINGTON  (Mass.),  Federalist  account  of 
Republican  Congressional  Convention 
held  at,  24. 

Adams,  John,  his  account  of  a  meeting  of 
the  "Caucus  Club,"  in  February,  1763, 
9 ;  the  recognized  Federalist  candidate 
for  Vice-President  in  1792, 13 ;  his  state- 
ment concerning  Hamilton's  intrigues 
in  1796,  14. 

Adams,  John  Quincy,  nomination  for  the 
Presidency  by  State  Legislatures  in  1822 
-3,  18;  his  statement  in  "Memoirs" 
concerning  the  holding  of  a  meeting  of 
members  of  Congress  in  opposition  to 
the  Congressional  caucus,  19;  nomi- 
nated for  President  at  a  mixed  conven- 
tion of  the  Republican  members  of  the 
Massachusetts  Legislature  and  dele- 
gates in  January,  1823,  33;  at  a  public 
meeting  at  Fredericksburg,  Va.,  in 
March,  1824,  35. 

Adams,  Samuel,  his  first  nomination  for 
representative  by  the  "  Caucus  Club," 
or  "  North  End  Caucus,"  8 ;  nomina- 
tion by  the  same  organization  as  one  of 
the  Whig  candidates  for  the  Legisla- 
ture in  1772,  10. 

Alabama,  resolutions  condemning  the 
Congressional  caucus  system  adopted 
by  the  Legislature  of,  19;  nomination 
of  Jackson  for  the  Presidency  by  joint 
resolution  of  the  Legislature  of  (1824), 
30 ;  extract  from  message  of  Governor 
Pickens,  vetoing  the  resolution,  31 ; 
nomination  of  Hugh  L.  White  for  the 
Presidency  by  joint  resolution  of  the 
Legislature  of  (1835),  31- 

Albany  (N.Y.),  account  of  early  disorderly 
primary  held  at,  97. 


Apportionment  of  delegates.  (See  Dele- 
gates.) 

Arkansas,  legal  definition  of  a  "  political 
party"  in,  176;  provision  for  filing  cer- 
tificates of  nomination  in,  176  (note  12) ; 
number  of  signatures  required  for  nomi- 
nation papers  in,  178  (note  16). 

Austin,  Benjamin,  denunciation  of  the 
Federalist  caucus  of  1800,  16. 

Australian  Ballot  Acts,  adoption  of  the, 
173;  the  regulation  of  nominations  un- 
der the,  174. 

BALTIMORE,  first  National  Convention 
held  in  (September,  1831),  36 ;  National 
Republican  Convention  held  in  (De- 
cember, 1831),  37  ;  Democratic  National 
Convention  held  in  (May,  1832),  38; 
condition  of  primaries  in  (in  1879),  1I2» 
present  condition  of  primaries  in,  113. 

"  Boss  rule  "  in  New  York  city,  109. 

"  Boss,"  the  State,  as  a  master  of  conven- 
tions, 132. 

Boston,  early  caucuses  in,  8 ;  John  Ad- 
ams's account  of  a  meeting  of  the  "  Cau- 
cus Club"  in,  9;  Dr.  Eliot's  account 
of  similar  meetings  in,  9  (note  18) ;  the 
"  North  End  Caucus  "  in,  and  its  con- 
nection with  the  "  Boston  Tea  Party," 
10;  the  "  South  End  Caucus"  and  the 
"Middle  District  Caucus,"  u  ;  Repub- 
lican caucus  for  the  nomination  of  a 
candidate  for  Congress  held  in  (1794), 
23  ;  nomination  of  a  candidate  for  Con- 
gress by  the  Republican  city  committee 
of  (1820).  25;  meeting  of  the  Federalist 
city  committee  of  (1816),  44;  present 
condition  of  caucuses  in,  115  ;  adoption 
of  party  rules  in,  155;  qualification  for 


280 


INDEX. 


enrolment  of  voters  under  Republican 
party  rules  in,  156;  manner  of  enrol- 
ment in,  1 59 ;  deprivation  of  enrolment 
in,  1 59 ;  working  of  the  enrolment  sys- 
tem in,  1 60;  party  rules  governing  the 
conduct  of  caucuses  in,  163;  cases  of 
disputed  choice  in,  165;  apportionment 
of  delegates  in,  167 ;  Massachusetts 
legislation  in  the  caucuses  in,  195;  Mu- 
nicipal League  of,  214. 

Buehler,  II.,  his  letter  suggesting  the  hold- 
ing of  "snap"  primaries  in  1835,  121. 

Burr,  Aaron,  the  "  regular "  Republican 
candidate  for  Vice- President  in  1796, 
14 ;  the  details  of  his  nomination  for 
Vice-President  in  1800,  15,  16. 

CALHOUN,  John  C.,  nominated  for  Presi- 
dent by  the  Legislatures  of  South  Caro- 
lina and  Georgia  in  1844,  31 ;  nominated 
for  Vice-President  by  the  "  Jackson  " 
State  Convention  of  Pennsylvania  in 
1828,34. 

California,  voting  strength  required  to 
enable  a  political  party  to  get  the  names 
of  its  primary  and  convention  nominees 
placed  upon  the  official  ballot  in,  175 
(note  5)  ;  number  of  signatures  required 
for  nomination  papers  in,  178  (notes  16 
and  17} ;  special  laws  governing  nomi- 
nations in,  183 ;  penal  provisions  in, 
187,  188. 

Cambridge  (Mass.),  reference  to  the  party 
rules  adopted  by  the  Republican  City 
Committee  of,  159  (note  17);  national 
party  lines  not  drawn  in  municipal  elec- 
tions in,  207  ;  municipal  parties  in,  207  ; 
events  leading  up  to  the  formation  of 
the  Library  Hall  Association  in,  207 ; 
organization  and  practical  working  of 
the  latter  in,  209. 

Caucus,  Congressional,  the:  I.  Origin 
and  early  history  of,  evidence  of  a 
caucus  in  1792,  13;  in  1796,  14;  cau- 
cuses held  by  both  the  Republican  and 
Federalist  parties  in  1800,  14;  Senator 
Smith's  statement  in  regard  to  the  Re- 
publican caucus  of  1800,  15;  testimony 
of  Hammond  in  regard  to  the  details, 
15,  16;  Austin's  scathing  denunciation 
of  the  Federalist  caucus  of  1800,  16; 
the  first  regularly  called  caucus,  that  of 
1804,  16. 


2.  Continuation  of,  criticism  of  Sena- 
tor Bradley 's  assumption  of  the  right  as 
chairman  of  the  caucus  of  1804  to  call  a 
caucus  in  1808, 17 ;  criticism  of  the  Con- 
gressional  nominating  caucus  by  the 
"Peace  Republicans"  in  1812,  17;  at- 
tack by  Mr.  Gaston,  of  North  Carolina, 
in  1814,  17 ;  the  result  of  the  caucus  of 
1816,  and  its  effect  in  arousing  popular 
opposition,  17, 18 ;  lull  in  the  opposition 
during  the   "  Era  of   Good    Feeling," 
1817-1822,  18. 

3.  Decline  and  fall  of  :  The  nomina- 
tion of  Jackson  by  the  members  of  the 
Tennessee  Legislature  in  August,  1822, 
18 ;   nomination  of  Clay  at  a  similar 
meeting  of  the  members  of  the  Kentucky 
Legislature  in  November,  18 ;  exciting 
newspaper  controversy  during  the  years 
1822  and  1823,  18;  resolutions  of  State 
Legislatures  urging  and  condemning  the 
holding  of  a  caucus  in   1824,   18,  19; 
address  of  the  Republican  members  of 
Congress  from  Pennsylvania,  19;  meet- 
ing of  "anti-caucus"  members  of  Con- 
gress in  January,  1824,  19  ;  the  call  for 
a  caucus  issued  February  6, 19 ;  the  cau- 
cus  held,   and   William    H.  Crawford 
nominated  for  the  Presidency,  20  ;  the 
campaign  of  1824,  and  the  repudiation 
of  the  Congressional  caucus  system  by 
the  people,  20 ;  various  methods  of  nom- 
ination resorted  to  in  1828,  and  the  final 
adoption  of  the  National  Convention  in 
1832,  20. 

Caucus,  or  Primary,  i.  Origin  and  his- 
tory of,  derivation  of  the  word,  7  (note 
13) ;  Gordon's  account  of  the  pre-revo- 
lutionary  caucus,  8 ;  John  Adams's  ac- 
count of  a  meeting  of  the  "Caucus 
Club,"  9;  later  account  of  the  same 
institution  by  Dr.  Eliot,  9  (note  18)  ; 
the  "  North  End  Caucus  "  and  its  con- 
nection with  the  Boston  Tea  Party,  10; 
the  "  South  End  Caucus,"  1 1 ;  the  "  Mid- 
dle District  Caucus,"  1 1  ;  the  post-revo- 
lutionary caucus,  12. 

2.  Present  status  of,  in  New  England, 
53 ;  outside  of  New  England,  56 ;  prep- 
aration for  caucuses,  56-59;   influence 
of  local  committees,  50-61. 

3.  Abuses  of,  importance  of  the  pri- 
maries, 95 ;  primaries  in  cities,  95 ;  in 


BUEHLER—  COMMITTEE. 


281 


the  country  districts,  96;  early  disor- 
derly primaries,  96-99 ;  new  difficulties 
in  the  primaries,  99;  the  primary  in 
New  York  city,  100 ;  the  Tammany  or- 
ganization, 101,  and  its  control  over  the 
Democratic  primaries,  101-104;  the  Re- 
publican organization  in  New  York  city 
prior  to  1883,  104-107 ;  the  county  De- 
mocracy in  New  York  city,  107 ;  the 
present  condition  of  the  New  York  pri- 
maries, 1 08;  boss  rule  in  New  York 
city,  109 ;  primaries  in  Philadelphia,  1 1 1 ; 
the  Baltimore  primaries,  112-115;  cau- 
cuses in  Boston,  115-121 ;  "snap"  cau- 
cuses and  primaries,  121;  "packed" 
caucuses  and  primaries,  125 ;  party  rules 
governing  the  conduct  of  caucuses  and 
primaries,  161. 

4.  Remedies  for  existing  evils  in: 
Party  rules  governing  the  conduct  of 
caucuses  and  primaries,  161 ;  statutory 
enactments  concerning  the  time  and 
place  of  holding  primaries,  184;  laws 
governing  the  qualifications  for  voting 
at  caucuses  and  primary  elections,  186 ; 
laws  governing  the  organization  and 
conduct  of  caucuses  and  primary  elec- 
tions, 186;  penal  provisions,  187. 

Caucus,  State  Legislative.  Origin  and 
development  of,  26 ;  decline  of,  in  New 
York,  27 ;  in  other  States,  29 ;  Presiden- 
tial nominations  by,.  31,  32 ;  nomination 
of  speaker,  clerk,  and  other  officers 
elected  by  the  Legislature  by  legislative 
caucus  of  the  party  members  of  a  sin- 
gle House,  72  ;  nomination  of  candidates 
for  the  United  States  Senate  by  a  joint 
caucus  of  the  two  Houses,  89. 

"  Caucus  Club,"  the.     (See  Caucus.) 

Caucus  Districts,  subdivision  of,  as  a  re- 
medy for  existing  evils,  143. 

Certificates  of  Nomination,  statutory  pro- 
visions concerning,  176. 

Chamberlain,  Joseph,  his  introduction  of 
the  American  caucus  system  into  Eng- 
land, 46  (note  134) ;  his  opinion  of  the 
chief  cause  of  bad  nominations  in  the 
United  States,  151. 

Cities,  nominations  in,  52. 

Citizens'  Associations,  supervision  by,  as 
a  remedy  for  existing  evils  in  large 
cities,  199;  difficulty  of  enforcing  laws, 
199;  citizens'  movements  and  tickets, 


200;  the  Philadelphia  "Committee  of 
One  Hundred,"  200;  the  New  York 
Committee  of  Seventy,  205 ;  the  Library 
Hall  Association  of  Cambridge,  Mass., 
207;  other  citizens'  associations,  214; 
conclusions  in  regard  to  citizens'  asso- 
ciations, 215. 

Civil  Service  Reform,  as  a  remedy  for  bad 
nominations,  149. 

Clay,  Henry,  nominated  for  the  Presidency 
at  a  meeting  of  the  members  of  the  Ken- 
tucky Legislature  in  November,  1822. 
18;  nominated  at  a  legislative  caucus  of 
the  Republican  members  of  the  Kentucky 
Legislature  in  November,  1822, 32;  nom- 
inated at  a  mixed  convention  composed 
of  Whig  members  of  the  Virginia  Legis- 
lature and  delegates  in  February  1843, 
33 ;  nominated  by  the  first  National 
Convention  of  the  National  Republican 
or  Whig  party  at  Baltimore,  in  Decem- 
ber, 1831,  38. 

Clinton,  De  Witt,  nominated  for  Presi- 
dent by  "Peace  Republicans"  in  1812, 
17;  his  nomination  indorsed  by  an  ir- 
regular convention  of  the  old  Federal- 
ist party,  17,  35,  36. 

Clinton,  George,  the  recognized  candi- 
date of  the  Republican  party  for  Vice- 
President  in  1792,  13;  believed  by 
Commodore  Nicholson  to  be  the  most 
available  candidate  for  Vice-President 
in  1800,  but  crowded  out  by  Burr,  15. 

Colonies,  nominations  in  the,  4;  in  the 
South,  4;  in  New  England  and  the 
middle  colonies,  5 ;  official  system  of 
nominations  in  New  Jersey,  5 ;  in  Con- 
necticut and  Massachusetts,  7. 

Colorado,  voting  strength  required  to  en- 
able a  political  party  to  get  the  names 
of  its  primary  and  convention  nominees 
placed  upon  the  official  ballot  in,  175 
(note  5) ;  number  of  signatures  required 
for  nomination  papers  in,  178  (note  16) ; 
provisions  for  withdrawal  of  candidates 
in,  180  ;  for  publication  of  nominations 
in,  182. 

Committee  of  One  Hundred,  in  Philadel- 
phia, 200;  formation  of,  201 ;  provisions 
of  the  constitution  of,  202 ;  history  of, 
203;  dissolution  of,  204. 

Committee  of  Seventy,  in  New  York,  205 ; 
formation  of,  205 ;  work  of,  206. 


282 


INDEX. 


Committees  of  Correspondence,  their  con- 
nection with  nominations  during  the 
Revolutionary  period,  n. 

Congress,  candidates  for,  how  nominated, 
88. 

Connecticut,  system  of  official  nomination 
in,  5. 

Convention,  Nominating,  the.  i.  His- 
tory of  development  of,  in  Pennsylva- 
nia, 21-23;  'n  Massachusetts,  23-25; 
first  period  of  the  State  Convention, 
25,  26;  legislative  caucus  period,  26,  27  ; 
final  adoption  of  the  convention  system 
in  nominations  for  State  offices,  28,  29 ; 
Presidential  nominations  by  State  Con- 
ventions, 33-35;  rise  of  the  National 
Convention,  36-39;  the  National  Con- 
vention fully  established,  39,  40;  the 
question  of  procedure  in  National  Con- 
ventions, 40-43;  the  call  of  National 
Conventions  and  the  choice  of  dele- 
gates, 43, 44. 

2.  Present  status  of,  Municipal  Con- 
ventions, 52;  County  Conventions,  61, 
62 ;  State  Conventions  :  apportionment 
of  delegates  to,  64 ;  preliminary  proceed- 
ings of,  64,  65 ;  nominating  procedure 
of,  65-68 ;  preparation  for  State  Conven- 
tions, 69-71;   Councillor  and  Judicial 
District  Conventions,  71 ;  State  Sena- 
torial and  Representative  District  Con- 
ventions, 71,  72 ;  National  Conventions : 
call  of  75 ;  choice  of  delegates  to,  76-78; 
organization  of,  78-84 ;  appointment  of 
committees  by,  80 ;  the  work  of  the  com- 
mittee on  credentials,  81,  82  ;  report  of 
the  committee  on  resolutions  or  "plat- 
form," 83 ;   nominating  proceedings  in, 
84-87  ;  Congressional  District  Conven- 
tions, 88-89. 

3.  Abuses   of,   in  general,  127;   the 
"Crawford  County  System"  as  a  sub- 
stitute for  the  convention  system,  127; 
corruption   and  fraud   in  conventions, 
130;  "snap''  conventions,  121,  132;  the 
State  "boss"  as  a  master  of  conven- 
tions, 132 ;  the  ''two-thirds  "  rule  in  Na- 
tional Conventions,  133  ;   the  unit  rule, 
134;  delegates  from  States  controlled 
by  the  other  party,  134. 

4.  Remedies   for   existing  evils   of: 
party  rules  in  regard  to  the  calling  of 
conventions,  166;  apportionment  of  dele- 


gates, 167 ;  party  rules  governing  the 
procedure  of  conventions,  167  ;  the  use 
of  proxies  in  conventions,  169;  statutory 
provisions  relative  to  nominating  con- 
ventions, 189. 

Convention  system,  abuses  of,  127.  (See 
Convention.) 

County  Democracy,  the,  in  New  York  city, 
107  ;  conduct  of  primaries  by,  108. 

County  Offices,  nominations  for,  6l. 

"  Crawford  County  "  System,  or  System  of 
"  Primary  Elections,"  reference  to,  56; 
description  of,  56;  in  nominations  for 
county  offices,  62 ;  as  a  substitute  for 
the  convention  system,  127  ;  as  a  remedy 
for  existing  evils,  145. 

Crawford,  William  II.,  effect  of  his  near 
approach  to  securing  the  Congressional 
caucus  nomination  in  1816,  in  arousing 
popular  opposition  to  the  caucus  sys- 
tem, 17;  his  nomination  by  the  caucus 
of  1824,  20 ;  his  defeat  in  the  election 
of  1824,  20. 

"  DARK  Horses "  in  national  conven- 
tions, 85. 

Delegates,  apportionment  of,  in  the  devel- 
opment of  the  nominating  convention 
in  Pennsylvania,  22,  23 ;  in  Massachu- 
setts, 25 ;  in  the  early  national  con- 
ventions, 36,  39,  43 ;  to  the  various 
conventions  in  Massachusetts  at  the 
present  time,  61,  64;  in  the  case  of 
State  conventions  generally,  64 ;  in  the 
case  of  national  conventions,  76 ;  dele- 
gates from  States  controlled  by  the 
other  party  as  an  evil  in  national  con- 
ventions, 134 ;  party  rules  governing, 
167. 

Delegates,  election  of,  in  the  early  history 
of  Pennsylvania,  23;  to  the  early  na- 
tional conventions,  37,  43  ;  at  the  pres- 
ent time,  in  general,  45,  54,  58  ;  in  the 
case  of  National  Conventions,  76. 

Delegates,  election  or  appointment  of  a 
permanent  board  of,  as  a  remedy  for 
existing  evils,  141. 

Delaware,  legal  definition  of  a  political 
party  in,  175;  provision  for  filing  nom- 
ination papers  in,  179  (note  19)  ;  pro- 
vision for  withdrawal  of  candidates  in, 
i  So  (note  22) ;  provision  for  settlement 
of  disputes  in,  181  (note  24). 


COMMITTEES  OF  CORRESPONDENCE— KENTUCKY.      283 


Difficulty  of  enforcing  laws,  199. 
Disputed  choice,  cases   of,  in  caucuses 

and  primaries,  party  rules  governing, 

165. 
Disputes,  settlement  of,  under  party  rules, 

165 ;  statutory  enactments  concerning, 

181. 

ELECTIVE  offices,  diminution  in  the  num- 
ber of,  as  a  remedy  for  bad  nomina- 
tions, 148. 

Enrolment  of  voters,  155;  qualifications 
for,  156 ;  manner  of,  157  ;  deprivation  of, 
159 ;  working  of  the  enrolment  system, 
1 60. 

FREDERICKSBURG  (Va.),  nomination  of 
Adams  and  Jackson  at  public  meeting 
held  at  (1824),  35. 

GASTON,  Member  of  Congress  from  North 
Carolina,  his  attack  on  the  Congres- 
sional caucus  system,  17. 

Georgia,  nomination  of  John  C.  Calhoun 
for  the  Presidency  by  the  Legislature 
of  (1844),  31. 

Gorham,  Benjamin,  nominated  for  Con- 
gress by  the  Republican  City  Commit- 
tee of  Boston  (1820),  25. 

Governor,  nominated  by  State  conven- 
tion, 64  ;  method  of  nomination,  65-68. 

HAMILTON,  Alexander,  Adams'  state- 
ment concerning  his  intrigues  in  1792 
and  1796,  14. 

IDAHO,  no  "  limitation  "  provision  in 
Australian  Ballot  Act  in,  175;  legal 
definition  of  "  political  party  "  in,  176; 
number  of  signatures  required  for  nom- 
ination papers  in,  178  (notes  16  and 
17);  provisions  for  the  withdrawal  of 
candidates  in,  180  (notes  21  and  22). 

Illinois,  voting  strength  required  to  enable 
a  political  party  to  get  the  names  of 
its  primary  and  convention  nominees 
placed  upon  the  official  ballot  in,  175 
(note  5) ;  number  of  signatures  required 
for  nomination  papers  in,  178  (note 
16)  ;  time  for  filing  notice  of  withdrawal 
by  candidates  in,  180  (note  21)  ;  pro- 
vision for  settlement  of  disputes  in, 
181  (note  24). 


Indiana,  voting  strength  required  to  ena- 
ble a  political  party  to  get  the  names  of 
its  primary  and  convention  nominees 
placed  upon  the  official  ballot  in,  175 
(note  5) ;  number  of  signatures  required 
for  nomination  papers  in,  178  (notes  16 
and  17)  ;  provision  for  settlement  of 
disputes  in,  181  (note  24). 

Intelligent  organization  as  a  remedy  for 
existing  evils,  153. 

Iowa,  voting  strength  required  to  enable 
a  political  party  to  get  the  names  of 
its  primary  and  convention  nominees 
placed  upon  the  official  ballot  in,  175 
(note  5) ;  number  of  signatures  required 
for  nomination  papers  in,  178  (notes  16 
and  17) ;  provisions  for  withdrawal  of 
candidates  in,  180  (notes  21  and  22); 
provision  for  settlement  of  disputes  in, 
181  (note  24). 

Israel,  nominations  in  the  choice  of  the 
judges  of,  3. 

JACKSON,  Andrew,  nomination  for  the 
Presidency  by  an  informal  meeting  of 
the  members  of  the  Tennessee  Legisla- 
ture in  August,  1822,  18;  nominated  by 
a  formal  resolution  of  the  Legislature 
of  Alabama  in  1824,  30;  nominated  by 
Pennsylvania  State  Convention  in  Jan- 
uary, 1828,  33, 34  ;  nominated  for  Vice- 
President  at  a  public  meeting  at  Fred- 
ericksburg,  Va.,  in  March,  1824,  35. 

Jefferson,  Thomas,  the  recognized  candi- 
date of  the  Republican  party  for  Pres- 
ident in  1796,  13;  nominated  at  the 
Republican  caucus  of  1800,  15;  ad- 
dresses of  State  Legislatures  urging 
him  to  accept  the  nomination  for  a  third 
term  in  1807,  30. 

KANSAS,  no  "  limitation  "  provision  for 
getting  names  of  candidates  printed  on 
official  ballot  in,  175  (note  6);  number 
of  signatures  required  for  nomination 
papers  in  178  (note  16) ;  provisions  for 
the  withdrawal  of  candidates  in,  180 
(notes  21  and  22) ;  provision  for  the 
the  settlement  of  disputes  in,  181  (note 
24). 

Kentucky,  nomination  of  Clay  for  the 
Presidency  at  an  informal  meeting  of 
the  members  of  the  Legislature  of 


284 


INDEX. 


(1822),  18;  James  Madison  recom- 
mended as  a  candidate  for  the  Presi- 
dency by  the  Legislature  of  (1807),  30; 
nomination  of  Clay  for  the  Presidency 
by  a  caucus  of  the  Republican  members 
of  the  Legislature  of  (1822),  32  ;  voting 
strength  required  to  enable  a  political 
party  to  get  the  names  of  its  primary 
and  convention  nominees  placed  upon 
the  official  ballot  in,  175  (note  5) ;  num- 
ber of  signatures  required  for  nomina- 
tion papers  in,  178  (note  16) ;  provision 
for  withdrawal  of  candidates  in,  180 
(note  22) ;  special  laws  governing  nom- 
inations in,  183;  provision  for  party 
registration  in,  185. 

LAW,  regulation  of  nominations  by,  as  a 
remedy  for  existing  evils,  143 ;  the  in- 
troduction of  legislation,  173;  the  regu- 
lation of  nominations  under  the  Aus- 
tralian Ballot  Acts,  174;  certificates  of 
nomination,  176;  nomination  papers, 
177  ;  filing  of  nomination  papers,  179; 
withdrawal  of  candidates,  180;  set- 
tlement of  disputes,  181 ;  publication 
of  nominations,  iSr  ;  penalties,  182; 
special  laws  governing  nominations, 
182 ;  time  and  place  of  holding  pri- 
maries, 183;  qualifications  for  voting 
at  caucuses  and  primary  elections,  185  ; 
organization  and  conduct  of  caucuses 
and  primary  elections,  186;  penal 
provisions,  187 ;  provisions  relative 
to  nominating  conventions,  189;  the 
Massachusetts  act  of  1894,  192;  Mas- 
sachusetts legislation  in  the  Boston 
caucuses,  195 ;  practical  effect  of  legis- 
lation, 197  ;  difficulty  of  enforcing  laws, 
199. 

Legislation,  the  introduction  of,  173  ;  prac- 
tical effect  of,  197.  (See  also  Law.) 

Library  Hall  Association,  of  Cambridge, 
Mass.,  207  ;  events  leading  up  to  forma- 
tion of,  207  ;  organization  of,  208  ;  by- 
laws of,  209  ;  practical  working  of,  210 ; 
success  of,  212;  causes  of  success  of, 

"3- 

Local  Committees,  motion  of  Mr.  Fairfax, 
of  Virginia,  in  regard  to,  at  the  Whig 
National  Convention  of  1832,  37  ;  devel- 
opment of,  44 ;  their  influence  on  nom- 
inations, 59. 


Local  offices,  nominations  for,  in  towns, 
51  ;  in  cities,  52  ;  caucuses  and  primary 
meetings,  53  ;  preparation  for  caucuses, 
56;  local  committees  and  their  influ- 
ence on  nominations,  59 ;  nominations 
for  county  offices,  61. 

MADISON,  James,  recommended  as  a 
candidate  for  the  Presidency,  by 
the  Kentucky  Legislature  in  1807, 
30. 

Maine,  resolutions  of  Legislature  of,  in 
favor  of  Congressional  caucus,  19 ; 
party  lines  not  strictly  drawn  in  town 
elections  in,  51 ;  voting  strength  re- 
quired to  enable  a  political  party  to 
get  the  names  of  its  caucus  and  con- 
vention nominees  placed  upon  the  offi- 
cial ballot  in,  175  (note  5) ;  number  of 
signatures  required  for  nomination  pa- 
pers in,  178  (notes  16  and  17);  provi- 
sion for  filing  nomination  papers  in,  179 
(note  19). 

Maryland,  resolutions  condemning  the 
Congressional  caucus  system  adopted 
by  the  Legislature  of,  19;  call  for  a  na- 
tional convention  issued  by  a  caucus  of 
the  National  Republican  or  Whig  mem- 
bers of  the  Legislature  of  (1831),  37; 
preponderance  of  delegates  from,  in  the 
Democratic  Convention  of  1835,  39! 
voting  strength  required  to  enable  a 
political  party  to  get  the  names  of 
its  primary  and  convention  nominees 
placed  upon  the  official  ballot  in,  175 
(note  5) ;  number  of  signatures  required 
for  nomination  papers  in,  178  (notes  16 
and  17). 

Massachusetts,  nominations  during  the 
Colonial  period  in,  5;  old  system  of 
official  nomination  in,  6, 7  ;  origin  of  the 
caucus  in,  7 ;  development  of  the  nomi- 
nating convention  in,  23 ;  nomination 
of  John  Quincy  Adams  at  a  mixed  con- 
vention of  members  of  the  Legislature 
of,  and  delegates  (1823),  33;  nomina- 
tion of  Daniel  Webster  by  the  Legisla- 
ture of  (1836),  40 ;  party  lines  not  drawn 
in  town  elections  in,  51  ;  election  and 
nomination  of  members  of  lower  branch 
of  city  council  and  of  State  Legislature 
in  cities  of.  52  ;  apportionment  of  dele- 
gates to  Republican  State  conventions 


LAW— NEW  HAMPSHIRE. 


285 


in,  64;  nominations  for  the  Executive 
Council  in,  71 ;  recent  introduction  of 
legislation  in  regard  to  nominations  in, 
173  ;  requirement  for  getting  names  of 
caucus  and  convention  nominees  placed 
upon  the  official  ballot,  175  (note  5) ; 
number  of  signatures  required  for  nom- 
ination papers  in,  178;  time  of  filing 
withdrawals  of  candidates  in,  180  (note 
21);  provision  for  settlement  of  dis- 
putes in,  181 ;  special  laws  governing 
nominations  in,  182 ;  provisions  rela- 
tive to  nominating  conventions  in,  189; 
caucus  act  of  1894,  192  ;  legislation  in 
the  Boston  caucuses,  195. 

Mechanics'  Club,  the,  its  influence  on 
nominations  in  New  York,  n,  12. 

Merchants'  Club,  the,  its  connection  with 
nominations  in  Boston,  9,  10. 

Michigan,  no  "  limitation  "  provision  in 
getting  names  of  candidates  placed 
upon  the  official  ballot  in,  175;  pro- 
vision for  filing  nomination  papers  in, 
179  (note  19) ;  provision  for  withdrawal 
of  candidates  in,  181  (note  22)  ;  special 
laws  governing  nominations  in,  182; 
provision  for  the  time  and  place  of 
holding  primaries  in,  184;  legal  quali- 
fications for  voting  at  caucuses  and  pri- 
mary elections  in,  185 ;  law  regulating 
the  organization  and  conduct  of  cau- 
cuses and  primary  elections  in,  186; 
penal  provisions  in,  187. 

Minnesota,  voting  strength  required  to 
enable  a  political  party  to  get  the  names 
of  its  primary  and  convention  nominees 
placed  upon  the  official  ballot  in,  175 
(note  5) ;  number  of  signatures  required 
for  nomination  papers  in,  178  (note  16) ; 
provision  for  withdrawal  of  candidates 
in,  180  (note  20). 

Minority  nominations,  as  a  remedy  for 
existing  evils,  147. 

Mississippi,  legal  definition  of  a  political 
party  in,  175;  provision  for  filing  cer- 
tificates of  nomination  in,  176 ;  number 
of  signatures  required  for  nomination 
papers  in,  178  (note  16) ;  provision 
for  filing  nomination  papers  in,  179 
(note  19) ;  time  for  filing  notice  of  with- 
drawal by  candidates  in,  180  (note  21) ; 
special  laws  governing  nominations  in, 
182 ;  penal  provisions  in,  187,  188 ; 


statutory  provisions  relative  to  nom- 
inating conventions  in,  190. 

Missouri,  voting  strength  required  to 
enable  a  political  party  to  get  the 
names  of  its  primary  and  convention 
nominees  placed  upon  the  official  bal- 
lot, 175  (note  5)  ;  number  of  signatures 
required  for  nomination  papers  in,  178 
(note  1 6)  ;  special  laws  governing  nom- 
inations in,  182 ;  provisions  regulating 
the  time  and  place  of  holding  primaries 
in,  184. 

Mixed  Conventions,  in  nominations  for 
State  offices,  26 ;  in  nominations  for 
President  and  Vice-President,  32. 

Municipal  affairs,  the  divorce  of  national 
and  State  politics  from,  as  a  remedy 
for  existing  evils,  150. 

Municipal  offices,  nominations  for,  52. 

NATIONAL  Conventions,  history  of,  36 ; 
the  question  of  procedure  in,  40 ;  call 
of,  75 ;  choice  of  delegates  to,  76 ;  pre- 
liminary canvass,  77  ;  organization  of, 
78 ;  nominating  proceedings  in,  84. 
(See  Convention.) 

National  elections,  relative  importance 
of,  74. 

National  offices,  nominations  for,  rela- 
tive importance  of  national  elections, 
74 ;  the  call  of  national  conventions, 
75  ;  the  choice  of  delegates,  76;  organ- 
ization of  national  conventions,  78 ; 
nominating  proceedings  in  national 
conventions,  84  ;  nomination  of  Presi- 
dential Electors,  87;  nominations  for 
the  national  House  of  Representatives, 
88  ;  nomination  of  candidates  for  the 
United  States  Senate,  89 ;  nominations 
for  the  offices  of  the  Senate  and  House 
of  Representatives,  90. 

Nevada,  voting  strength  required  to  ena- 
ble a  political  party  to  get  the  names  of 
its  primary  and  convention  nominees 
placed  upon  the  official  ballot  in,  175 
(note  5) ;  number  of  signatures  required 
for  nomination  papers  in,  178  (note  16) ; 
special  laws  governing  nominations  in, 
182. 

New  difficulties  in  the  primaries,  99. 

New  Hampshire,  proposition  for  calling 
a  national  convention  of  the  Demo- 
cratic party  first  advanced  by  the  Dem- 


286 


INDEX. 


ocrats  of,  38 ;  no  provision  in  Australian 
Ballot  Act  for  nomination  papers,  174 ; 
voting  strength  required  to  enable  a 
political  party  to  get  the  names  of  its 
caucus  and  convention  nominees  placed 
upon  the  official  ballot,  175  (note  5) ; 
provision  for  filing  nomination  papers 
in,  179  (note  19). 

New  Jersey,  system  of  official  nomination 
in  early  history  of,  5 ;  introduction  of 
legislation  in  regard  to  nominations  in, 
173;  "limitation  provision"  in,  175 
(note  5)  ;  number  of  signatures  required 
for  nomination  papers  in,  178  (notes 
1 6  and  17) ;  time  for  filing  withdrawals 
of  candidates  in,  180  (note  21) ;  settle- 
ment of  disputes  in,  181  (note  24) ; 
special  laws  governing  nominations  in, 
183;  statutory  provisions  regulating 
the  organization  and  conduct  of  cau- 
cuses and  primary  elections  in,  186; 
penal  provisions  in,  188. 

New  York,  city  of,  nomination  of  dele- 
gates to  Continental  Congress  in  1774, 
II  ;  early  disorderly  primaries  in,  97  ; 
present  condition  of  primaries  in,  100, 
108  ;  the  Tammany  organization  in,  101 ; 
the  Republican  organization  in,  prior  to 
1883,  104 ;  the  county  Democracy  in, 
107  ;  "  boss  rule  "  in,  109  ;  adoption  of 
Republican  party  rules  in,  154;  qualifi- 
cations for  enrolment  under  the  Re- 
publican rules  in,  156;  manner  of  enrol- 
ment, 157  ;  deprivation  of  enrolment, 
159  ;  working  of  the  enrolment  system 
in,  161 ;  Republican  rules  governing 
the  conduct  of  caucuses  and  primaries 
in,  161 ;  Republican  rules  governing  the 
call  of  conventions  in,  166;  apportion- 
ment of  delegates,  167  ;  procedure  of 
conventions,  169;  status  of  office-hold- 
ers, 170;  the  Committee  of  Seventy 
and  its  work  in,  205. 

New  York,  State  of,  nomination  of  De 
Witt  Clinton  for  the  Presidency,  in 
1812,  at  a  caucus  of  the  "  Peace  Repub- 
licans "  of  the  New  York  Legislature, 
at  which  resolutions  were  adopted  con- 
demning the  Congressional  caucus  sys- 
tem, 17,  31  ;  resolutions  adopted  at  a 
caucus  of  the  Republican  members 
of  the  Legislature  in  favor  of  hold- 
ing a  Congressional  caucus  in  1824, 


18 ;  history  of  the  decline  of  the 
State  legislative  caucus  in  New  York, 
27-29;  choice  of  delegates  to  Demo- 
cratic national  convention  by  the  State 
convention,  77  ;  early  legislation  in  re- 
gard to  nominations  in,  173;  definition 
of  a  political  party  in,  175  (note  5) ; 
number  of  signatures  for  nomination 
papers  required  in,  178  (note  16) ;  pro- 
visions for  filing  nomination  papers 
in,  179  (note  20);  time  for  filing  with- 
drawal of  candidates  in,  180  (note  21) ; 
settlement  of  disputes  in,  181  (note 
24) ;  special  laws  governing  nomina- 
tions in,  183  ;  statutory  provisions  con- 
cerning the  time  and  place  of  hold- 
ing primaries  in,  184;  concerning  quali- 
fications for  voting  at  caucuses  and 
primary  elections  in,  185 ;  laws  gov- 
erning the  organization  and  conduct 
of  caucuses  and  primary  elections  in, 
1 86;  penal  provisions  in,  188. 

Nomination  "by  petition."  (See  Nom- 
ination Papers.) 

Nomination  Papers,  46 ;  as  a  substitute 
for  the  caucus,  144 ;  statutory  provi- 
sions concerning,  177;  regulations  for 
the  filing  of,  179;  the  withdrawal  of 
candidates  nominated  by,  180 ;  penal- 
ties for  defacing,  etc.,  182. 

Nominating  machinery,  complete  legal- 
ization of,  as  a  remedy  for  existing 
evils,  146. 

North  Dakota,  no  "  limitation  "  provision 
in,  175  (note  6) ;  legal  definition  of 
"political  party"  in,  176;  number  of 
signatures  required  for  nomination 
papers  in,  178  (notes  16  and  17) ;  pro- 
visions for  the  withdrawal  of  candidates 
in,  180  (notes  21  and  22) ;  law  regu- 
lating the  use  of  proxies  in  conven- 
tions in,  189. 

OFFICE-HOLDERS,  status  of,  party  rules 
governing,  170. 

"  Official "  Nomination,  in  the  Colonial 
Period,  in  New  Jersey,  5  ;  in  Connecti- 
cut, 5,  6,  7  ;  in  Massachusetts,  7. 

Ohio,  nomination  of  Judge  McLean  for 
the  Presidency  by  a  legislative  caucus 
in  (1836),  40;  present  method  of  choos- 
ing delegates  to  national  conventions 
definitely  adopted  by  the  Whig  State 


NEW  JERSEY— PHILADELPHIA. 


287 


Convention  of  (1838),  43;  voting 
strength  required  to  enable  a  political 
party  to  get  the  names  of  its  primary 
and  convention  nominees  placed  upon 
the  official  ballot  in,  175  (note  5); 
number  of  signatures  required  for  nom- 
ination papers  in,  178  (notes  16  and 
17)  ;  provision  for  withdrawal  of  candi- 
dates in,  180  (note  22) ;  provision  for 
settlement  of  disputes  in,  181  (note  24). 
Oregon,  voting  strength  required  to  en- 
able a  political  party  to  get  the  names 
of  its  primary  and  convention  nominees 
placed  upon  the  official  ballot,  175 
(note  5) ;  number  of  signatures  required 
for  nomination  papers  in,  178  (notes 
1 6  and  17);  provision  for  the  with- 
drawal of  candidates  in,  180  ;  provision 
for  publication  of  nominations  in,  182  ; 
special  laws  governing  nominations  in, 
183 ;  law  governing  the  time  and  place 
of  holding  primaries  in,  183,  184 ;  legal 
qualifications  for  voting  at  caucuses 
and  primaries  in,  185 ;  penal  provisions 
in,  188. 

"  PACKED  "  Caucuses  and  Primaries,  125. 

"  Parlor  Caucuses,"  in  the  Colonial  Pe- 
riod, 5  ;  caucus  of  the  officers  of  the 
Pennsylvania  State  Militia  in  1782,  12, 
13;  nominations  for  local  offices,  51  ; 
nominations  for  lower  House  of  the 
State  Legislature,  57  ;  for  the  nomina- 
tion of  delegates  to  the  various  con- 
ventions, 58,  59 ;  for  the  naming  of 
delegates  to  the  State  Convention,  70. 

Party  Organization,  growth  of,  44. 

Party  rules,  as  a  remedy  for  existing 
evils,  142 ;  the  adoption  of  party  rules, 
154;  enrolment  of  voters,  155;  quali- 
fications for  enrolment,  156;  manner 
of  enrolment,  157;  deprivation  of  en- 
rolment, 159;  working  of  the  enrol- 
ment system,  160 ;  the  conduct  of 
caucuses  and  primaries,  161  ;  cases 
of  disputed  choice,  165  ;  the  call  of 
conventions,  166;  apportionment  of 
delegates,  167  ;  procedure  of  conven- 
tions, 167;  the  use  of  proxies,  169; 
status  of  office-holders,  170;  conclu- 
sions in  regard  to  party  rules,  171. 

Penalties,  for  defacing,  destroying,  falsi- 
fying, or  suppressing  certificates  of  nom- 


ination and  nomination  papers,  182 ; 
for  the  violation  of  special  laws  gov- 
erning nominations,  187. 

Pennsylvania,  early  machine  methods  in, 
12,  13;  address  of  Pennsylvania  mem- 
bers of  Congress  in  regard  to  the 
congressional  caucus  of  1824,  19;  de- 
velopment of  the  nominating  conven- 
tion in,  21-23;  early  State  conventions 
in,  26 ;  nomination  of  Jackson  for  the 
Presidency  at  State  convention  held  at 
Harrisburg  in  January,  1828,  33;  early 
suggestion  of  a  national  convention  by 
a  Pennsylvania  member  of  Congress,  36 ; 
nomination  of  Harrison  at  irregular  con- 
vention held  at  Harrisburg  (1836),  40; 
successful  protest  of  four  Pennsylvania 
delegates  at  the  Republican  National 
Convention  of  1876  against  the  "  unit 
rule,"  41  ;  unsuccessful  protest  against 
the  same  rule  by  fifteen  of  the  Penn- 
sylvania delegates  at  the  Democratic 
National  Convention  of  1892,  42  ;  Pre- 
liminary Republican  National  Conven- 
tion held  at  Pittsburg  in  February, 
1856,  45;  account  of  "snap"  conven- 
tion in  1835,  121  ;  introduction  of  legis- 
lation in  regard  to  nominations  in,  173  ; 
voting  strength  required  to  enable  a 
political  party  to  get  its  primary  and 
convention  nominees  placed  upon  the 
official  ballot,  175  (note  5);  number 
of  signatures  required  for  nomination 
papers  in,  178  (notes  16  and  17) ;  settle- 
ment of  disputes  in,  181  (note  24) ; 
special  laws  governing  nominations  in, 
182  ;  laws  governing  the  organization 
and  conduct  of  caucuses  and  primary 
elections  in,  186;  penal  provisions  in, 
188  (note  60)  and  189. 

Philadelphia,  frauds  in  the  election  of  a 
councillor  for  the  county  of  (1782),  12  ; 
nomination  of  candidates  for  the  State 
legislature  in  (1789),  21  ;  account  of 
disorderly  primary  in,  in  1826,  98 ; 
present  condition  of  primaries  in,  in  ; 
adoption  of  Republican  party  rules  in, 
155  ;  qualifications  for  enrolment  under 
the  Republican  rules  in,  156;  manner 
of  enrolment  in,  158;  working  of  the 
enrolment  system  in,  160;  provisions 
of  the  Republican  rules  in  regard  to 
the  conduct  of  primaries  in,  162 ;  cases 


288 


INDEX. 


of  disputed  choice,  166;  the  call  of  con- 
ventions, 166;  apportionment  of  dele- 
gates, 167  ;  procedure  of  conventions, 
167 ;  the  use  of  proxies,  169;  status  of 
office-holders,  171  ;  the  Committee  of 
One  Hundred  and  its  work  in,  200. 

Presidential  electors,  how  nominated,  87. 

Presidential  nominations,  by  legislative 
resolution,  29 ;  by  State  legislative  cau- 
cus, 31  ;  by  mixed  conventions,  32  ;  by 
State  conventions,  33 ;  by  public  meet- 
ings, 35  ;  by  national  conventions,  36 ; 
at  the  present  time,  75. 

President  pro  tern,  of  the  U.  S.  Senate, 
how  nominated,  90;  of  State  senate, 
how  nominated,  72. 

Primaries  (see  also  Caucus),  importance 
of,  95 ;  in  cities,  95 ;  early  disorderly 
primaries,  96;  new  difficulties  in,  99; 
in  New  York  city,  100;  in  Philadelphia, 
in;  in  Baltimore,  112;  "  snap "  pri- 
maries, 121  ;  "  packed"  primaries,  125  ; 
laws  governing  the  time  and  place  of 
holding,  183 ;  qualifications  for  voting 
at  caucuses  and  primary  elections,  185 ; 
laws  governing  the  organization  and 
conduct  of,  186. 

"Primary  election,"  system  of.  (See 
"Crawford  County  System.") 

Primary  elections.  (See  Caucus  or  Pri- 
mary.) 

Proportional  representation,  as  a  remedy 
for  existing  evils,  147. 

Proxies  in  conventions,  party  rules  gov- 
erning the  use  of,  169;  North  Dakota 
act  for  the  regulation  of,  189. 

Public  affairs,  necessity  of  greater  in- 
terest in,  on  the  part  of  the  voters,  151 ; 
opinion  of  Rt.  Hon.  Joseph  Chamber- 
lain, 151 ;  of  Judge  Odin  Thayer,  152. 

Publication  of  nominations,  statutory  pro- 
visions requiring,  181. 

REFORM,  need  of,  in  nominations,  141. 

Remedies  for  existing  evils :  need  of  re- 
form, 141 ;  the  election  or  appointment 
of  a  permanent  board  of  delegates,  141 ; 
regulation  of  nominations  by  party  rules, 
142,  154;  sub-division  of  caucus  dis- 
tricts, 143;  regulation  of  nominations  by 
law,  143,  173;  "nomination  papers  "as 
a  substitute  for  the  caucus,  144;  the 
substitution  of  primary  elections  for  the 


system  of  delegate  conventions,  145; 
complete  legalization  of  nominating  ma- 
chinery, 146;  minority  nominations,  147 ; 
proportional  representation,  147;  dimi- 
nution in  the  number  of  elective  offices, 
148;  civil  service  reform,  149;  the  di- 
vorce of  national  and  State  politics  from 
municipal  affairs,  150;  greater  interest 
in  public  affairs  on  the  part  of  the  voters, 
151 ;  the  need  of  education,  152  ;  intelli- 
gent organization,  1 53 ;  supervision  by 
citizens'  associations,  199. 

Republican  Organization,  the,  in  New 
York  city:  history  prior  to  1883,  104; 
the  assembly  district  associations,  105; 
result  of  their  establishment,  106;  pres- 
ent condition  of  the  Republican  prima- 
ries, 1 08. 

Rhode  Island,  voting  strength  required  to 
enable  a  political  party  to  get  the  names 
of  its  caucus  and  convention  nominees 
placed  upon  the  official  ballot  in,  175 
(note  5) ;  number  of  signatures  required 
for  nomination  papers  in,  178  (notes  16 
and  17) ;  provision  for  filing  nomination 
papers  in,  179  (note  19) ;  time  for  filing 
notice  of  withdrawal  by  candidates  in, 
180  (note  21). 

Rome,  nominations  in  the  early  days  of,  3. 

Roosevelt,  Theodore,  his  account  of  the 
Republican  primaries  in  Baltimore, 
"3- 

SELF-ANNOUNCED  Candidacy.  In  the 
early  days  of  Rome,  3 ;  in  England,  3, 
4,  46  (note  134) ;  in  the  American  Col- 
onies, 4,  5 ;  in  the  United  States  down 
to  the  Civil  War, 4;  in  the  United  States 
at  the  present  time,  5  (note  5),  46. 

Senate,  U.  S.,  candidate  for,  how  nomi- 
nated, 89. 

"  Snap  "  Conventions,  122,  132. 

"  Snap  "  Caucuses  and  Primaries,  early 
instance  of,  121  ;  example  of,  in  iSSo, 
122;  recent  instance  of  (1892),  123. 

"  Sons  of  Liberty,"  their  connection  with 
nominations  during  the  Revolutionary 
period,  n. 

South  Carolina,  nomination  of  John  C. 
Calhoun  for  the  Presidency  by  the 
Legislature  of  (1844),  31;  only  State 
without  an  Australian  Ballot  Act,  174; 
special  laws  governing  nominations  in, 


PRESIDENTIAL  ELECTORS  — WEST  VIRGINIA. 


289 


182;  legal  qualifications  for  voting  at 
primary  elections  in,  185. 

South  Dakota,  no  "  limitation  "  provision 
in,  175;  legal  definition  of  "political 
party  "in,  176;  number  of  signatures 
required  for  nomination  papers  in,  178 
(notes  16  and  17);  time  for  filing 
withdrawals  by  candidates  in,  180 
(note  21). 

Speaker,  of  the  lower  House  of  the  State 
Legislature,  how  nominated,  72 ;  of  the 
National  House  of  Representatives,  90. 

Special  laws  governing  nominations  apart 
from  the  Australian  Ballot  provisions, 

183- 

"  Stampede  "  in  a  national  convention, 
86. 

State  "  Boss,"  the,  as  a  master  of  conven- 
tions, 132. 

State  (Central)  Committee,  calling  of  State 
convention  by,  64 ;  how  chosen,  64 
(note  i) ;  arrangement  of  preliminary 
work  of  the  State  convention  by,  65, 
66 ;  abuse  of  power  by,  69. 

State  Convention.     (See  Convention.) 

State  Legislature,  members  of,  how  nom- 
inated, 71. 

State  Offices,  nominations  for.  The  gen- 
eral system,  63 ;  State  conventions,  64 ; 
nominating  procedure  of  State  conven- 
tions, 65;  nomination  of  minor  State 
officers,  68 ;  preparation  for  State  con- 
ventions, 69 ;  executive  councillors  and 
judges,  71;  nominations  for  the  State 
Legislature,  71 ;  the  nomination  of  offi- 
cers elected  by  the  Legislature,  72. 

Sulzberger,  M.,  his  plan  for  remedying 
existing  evils,  141. 

Supervision  by  Citizens'  Associations. 
(See  Citizens'  Associations.) 

TAMMANY  Organization,  the,  history  of, 
101 ;  its  organization,  101,  102 ;  its  meth- 
ods, 102 ;  conduct  of  the  primaries  by, 
103 ;  conclusions  in  regard  to,  104. 

Tennessee,  nomination  of  Jackson  for  the 
Presidency  at  an  informal  meeting  of 
the  members  of  the  Legislature  of 
(1822),  18;  resolutions  of  the  Legisla- 
ture of,  condemning  the  Congressional 
caucus  system,  19. 

Terry,  Henry  T.  Plan  suggested  by  him 
for  improving  nominations,  147. 


Thayer,  Adin,  extract  from  speech  of,  em- 
phasizing the  importance  of  attendance 
at  the  caucuses  and  primaries,  152. 

Towns,  nominations  in,  51. 

"  Two-thirds  Rule,"  the,  in  national  con- 
ventions :  origin  and  history  of,  40,  41 ; 
criticism  of,  133 ;  in  State  conventions, 
137- 

"  UNIT  RULE,"  the,  origin  and  develop- 
ment of,  in  national  conventions,  41 ; 
successful  revolt  against,  in  the  Repub- 
lican National  Convention  of  1876,  41, 
42 ;  finally  abandoned  at  the  Republi- 
can Convention  of  1880,  42;  protest 
against,  at  the  Democratic  National 
Convention  of  1892,  42  ;  still  in  force  in 
Democratic  national  conventions,  42, 
43;  criticism  of,  134;  in  State  conven- 
tions, 137. 

VERMONT,  voting  strength  required  to 
enable  a  political  party  to  get  the  names 
of  its  caucus  and  convention  nominees 
placed  upon  the  official  ballot  in,  175 
(note  5) ;  number  of  signatures  required 
for  nomination  papers  in,  178  (notes 
16  and  17). 

Vice-President,  how  nominated,  86 ;  care- 
lessness in  selecting  candidates  for,  86. 

Virginia,  resolutions  adopted  by  Legisla- 
ture of,  in  favor  of  Congressional  cau- 
cus (1824),  19;  nomination  of  Clay  at 
a  mixed  convention  of  delegates  and 
Whig  members  of  the  Legislature  of 
(1843),  335  nomination  of  Adams  and 
Jackson  at  a  public  meeting  at  Fred- 
ericksburg  in  March,  1824,  35 ;  prepon- 
derance of  delegates  from,  in  the 
Democratic  Convention  of  1835,  39- 

WASHINGTON  (State of), no  "limitation" 
provision  in  Australian  Ballot  Act  in, 
175 ;  legal  definition  of  "  political  party  " 
in,  176;  number  of  signatures  required 
for  nomination  papers  in,  178  (notes  16 
and  17) ;  provisions  for  the  withdrawal 
of  candidates  in,  180  (notes  21  and  22). 

Washington  (D.  C.),  national  Republi- 
can convention  of  young  men  held  at, 
(1832),  38. 

West  Virginia,  voting  strength  required  to 
enable  a  political  party  to  get  the  names 


290 


INDEX. 


of  its  primary  and  convention  nominees 
placed  upon  the  official  ballot,  175  (note 
5) ;  provision  for  filing  certificates  of 
nomination  in,  176  (note  12);  number 
of  signatures  required  for  nomination 
papers  in,  178  (notes  16  and  17) ;  filing 
of  nomination  papers  in,  179  (note 
19) ;  provision  for  withdrawal  of  can- 
didates in,  180  (note  22) ;  special  laws 
governing  nominations  in,  183 ;  law 
governing  conduct  of  caucuses  and  pri- 
mary elections  in,  186 ;  penal  provisions 
in,  188. 

White,  Hugh  L.,  nominated  for  President 
by  a  joint  resolution  of  the  Alabama 
Legislature  in  January,  1835,  31,  39. 

Wisconsin,  voting  strength  required  to 
enable  a  political  party  to  get  the  names 


of  its  caucus  and  convention  nominees 
placed  upon  the  official  ballot  in,  175 
(note  5) ;  number  of  signatures  required 
for  nomination  papers  in,  178  (notes 
16  and  17). 

Withdrawal  of  candidates,  statutory  pro- 
visions concerning,  180. 

Wyoming,  no  "limitation"  provision  in 
Australian  Ballot  Act  in,  175;  number 
of  signatures  required  for  nomination 
papers  in,  178  (note  16) ;  provision  for 
the  withdrawal  of  candidates  in,  iSo 
(note  22);  special  laws  governing  nom- 
inations in,  183;  requirements  as  to  the 
time  and  place  of  holding  primaries  in, 
183 ;  law  governing  the  organization 
and  conduct  of  caucuses  and  primary 
elections  in,  187. 


University  of  California 

SOUTHERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FACILITY 

405  Hilgard  Avenue,  Los  Angeles,  CA  90024-1388 

Return  this  material  to  the  library 

from  which  it  was  borrowed. 


JK2063 


D3 


AUTHOR 

Dallinger,   F.W. 


ITUE  Nominations  for  elective 
office  in  the  United  States. 


DATE  DUE 


BORROWER'S  NAME 


Dallinger,  F.W. 

Nominations  for  elective  office 
in  the  United  States. 


